NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Friday had a first-hand experience of the misuse of its ruling that an accused is entitled to bail if he as undertrial has served half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence he is accused of.
One Mohd Tapseer, executive council member of Karnataka unit of proscribed organisation People's Front of India (PFI), was arrested in 2022. Senior advocate Gagan Gupta, on his behalf, claimed that the minimum punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against him was five years and given the mandate of the SC's judgment, his client was entitled to bail.
Gupta said Tapseer was entitled to bail as there is no material evidence produced against him by the prosecution in the chargesheet and that since there are over 700 witnesses to be examined, the trial would be prolonged. The state counsel told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that though the trial court is taking up the matter almost every week for hearing, the charges have not yet been framed because of the delaying tactics adopted by many of the accused, all of whom are represented by a single advocate. He said the accused file multiple bail petitions and the trial court remains engaged in deciding them. Because of this, the trial court has not been able to devote time to continue with the trial proceedings and frame charges.
The bench asked the trial court to expeditiously proceed to the stage of framing charges against the accused and empowered it to send a communication to the court for cancellation of already bail granted to those accused if they were found adopting delaying tactics.
One Mohd Tapseer, executive council member of Karnataka unit of proscribed organisation People's Front of India (PFI), was arrested in 2022. Senior advocate Gagan Gupta, on his behalf, claimed that the minimum punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against him was five years and given the mandate of the SC's judgment, his client was entitled to bail.
Gupta said Tapseer was entitled to bail as there is no material evidence produced against him by the prosecution in the chargesheet and that since there are over 700 witnesses to be examined, the trial would be prolonged. The state counsel told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that though the trial court is taking up the matter almost every week for hearing, the charges have not yet been framed because of the delaying tactics adopted by many of the accused, all of whom are represented by a single advocate. He said the accused file multiple bail petitions and the trial court remains engaged in deciding them. Because of this, the trial court has not been able to devote time to continue with the trial proceedings and frame charges.
The bench asked the trial court to expeditiously proceed to the stage of framing charges against the accused and empowered it to send a communication to the court for cancellation of already bail granted to those accused if they were found adopting delaying tactics.
You may also like

Bihar elections: From catalyst to stabilising force, CPI(ML) bets on pragmatism over ideological rigidity

Is Justin Bieber quitting music? His Halloween Twitch confession about his 'daunting tour' leaves fans heartbroken

Assembly elections: As cash transfers emerge as quickest way to victory at hustings, will it work in Bihar?

UK train attack: Multiple passengers stabbed in Cambridgeshire; two suspects held, London North Eastern Railway halts services

James Harden and Paije Speights host stylish baby shower, celebrating new chapter amid intimate Halloween moments




