The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has directed a Special Court in Srinagar to speed up the trial of a man booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), observing that prolonged incarceration without timely completion of trial raises serious constitutional concerns.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Arif Billa Sheikh, a resident of Baramulla, who sought directions for early conclusion of the trial arising out of FIR No. 03/2020 registered at Police Station Bomai. The case involves offences under various provisions of the UAPA, the Explosive Substances Act, and the Indian Penal Code.
According to the plea, the FIR was registered in March 2020, the charge sheet was filed in October 2020, and charges were framed in March 2021. The petitioner argued that despite several witnesses already being examined, the proceedings were moving slowly while he continued to remain in custody.
Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal noted that the right to speedy trial is an essential part of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees protection of life and personal liberty. The Court referred to multiple Supreme Court judgments on speedy trial and prolonged incarceration.
The bench observed,
“Fair procedure under Article 21 necessarily includes fair investigation, fair inquiry and expeditious conclusion of trial.”
The Court said that although allegations under the UAPA are serious in nature, constitutional safeguards cannot be ignored merely because the offences alleged are grave.
“Seriousness of allegations, by itself, cannot eclipse constitutional guarantees available even to an accused charged with grave offences,” the Court stated.
Justice Nargal further remarked that criminal law proceeds on the principle of presumption of innocence until guilt is established through a fair trial.
The Court also highlighted Section 19 of the National Investigation Agency Act, which requires Special Courts to conduct trials on a day-to-day basis and give them priority over other matters.
Referring to delays in criminal proceedings, the Court observed that unnecessary adjournments weaken public confidence in the justice system and may turn the process itself into punishment.
“The constitutional guarantee under Article 21 cannot be rendered illusory by procedural stagnation,” the Court said.
While clarifying that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations against the petitioner, the High Court held that the grievance regarding delay in trial deserved consideration.
The Court directed the concerned Trial Court/Special Court to accord priority to the case and make all possible efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously. It also asked both the prosecution and the defence to cooperate and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Case Details
Case Title: Arif Billa Sheikh v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Case Number: WP(C) 964/2026
Judge: Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Decision Date: 21 May 2026
