The Orissa High Court recently delivered a landmark judgment emphasizing the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Justice Gourishankar Satapathy granted bail to Dilip Ranjan Nath, accused in a ₹31 crore fraud case, after noting his prolonged incarceration of over six and a half years as an undertrial prisoner.
The petitioner, a director of a company implicated in illegal money circulation schemes, faced charges under Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), and 409 (criminal breach of trust) of the IPC, alongside provisions of the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act. The CBI alleged he lured investors with promises of high returns, defrauding thousands across 485 branches.
The Court highlighted the systemic delays in the trial, where only 11 out of 177 witnesses had been examined since 2018. Justice Satapathy:
“Detention beyond six and a half years, without trial completion, violates the essence of Article 21. No statute defines the exact timeframe for such infringement, but prolonged custody without resolution undermines justice.”
The judgment referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Tapas Kumar Palit v. State of Chhattisgarh (2025), which underscored the psychological and social toll of extended pretrial detention. The apex court had observed:
“An undertrial’s incarceration for six to seven years without verdict infringes their right to life and dignity. The accused faces stigma, job loss, and financial strain despite presumed innocence.”
The CBI opposed bail, citing the massive financial fraud. However, the Court stressed that even serious charges cannot negate constitutional safeguards. It criticized the agency’s failure to expedite the trial or clarify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
The court granted bail to the petitioner on a bond of ₹5 lakh, requiring two solvent sureties of equivalent value. Key conditions mandate regular attendance at trial hearings unless formally exempted, a prohibition on leaving the jurisdictional limits of the trial court without prior permission, and the surrender of his passport (if any) to the court.
The petitioner must also furnish his residential address, contact details, and cooperate fully with ongoing investigations. The court explicitly warned that any violation of these terms—including future involvement in similar offenses—could lead to immediate bail cancellation. Notably, the decision aligns with the earlier release of co-accused Basanti Mondal in a related case (BLAPL No. 3212 of 2024), underscoring the judiciary’s stance against indefinite undertrial detention without conclusive progress in trials.
Case Title: Dilip Ranjan Nath v. Republic of India (CBI)
Case No: BLAPL No. 12707 of 2023
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S.C. Mahapatra, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, Advocate
Counsel for the CBI: Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI
