The Delhi High Court has strongly emphasized that courts must actively safeguard the right to a speedy trial of an accused instead of realizing the delay too late and regretting it afterward.
The court made this observation while granting bail to a man accused in a cheating case. The order was passed by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, who noted that the trial was likely to take a long time to complete, and keeping the accused in continued custody was not justified.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court: False Rape Complaints Overburden Courts, Harm Real Victims
“How long is long enough, before a court realises that an undertrial has been in custody for too long, and the constitutional promise of speedy trial has been repudiated? It is this concern that is at the heart of the present judgement,”
– Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani
The man had already spent more than 13 months in judicial custody, and the court found no valid reason for his further detention. It noted that the accused had already been subjected to 'prisonisation' without being proven guilty, which raised serious questions about the violation of his fundamental rights.
The case was registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Delhi in 2023. The accused was booked under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which relate to criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy.
According to the case details, the man was alleged to have acted as a conduit for other accused persons in channeling and siphoning off unclaimed funds with the Customs Department through multiple bank accounts. However, the court found that the allegations did not directly involve him in any act of forgery.
“There is no allegation that the accused himself was involved in forging any scroll or cheque or other document relating to the Customs Department,”
– Delhi High Court
Further, the court clarified that there was no material on record to prima facie show that the man was even aware of the nature or scale of the money being routed or the extent of the offence allegedly committed by the main accused.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court: Directors Not Personally Liable for Company’s Export Default Without Specific Allegations
The chargesheet filed by the prosecution, along with other evidence, ran into 10,000 pages, yet the court noted that charges were yet to be framed, and the trial hadn’t even begun. This delay in the legal process raised serious constitutional concerns.
“Regardless of the maximum punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioner, the court must never lose sight of the fact that, as of now, the petitioner is only an accused pending trial and has not been held guilty for any offences as of date,”
– Delhi High Court
The court further stressed that an undertrial cannot be kept behind bars endlessly while waiting for the trial to start. The prolonged pre-trial detention, without a clear timeline, defeats the very essence of a fair and speedy justice system.
“As argued on behalf of the petitioner, he cannot be detained in custody endlessly awaiting completion of trial,”
– Delhi High Court
Title: Amit Agrawal v. STATE OF NCT DELHI & ORS
