Prolonged Detention Violates Article 21: Punjab & Haryana High Court Asserts Bail is a Rule, Jail is an Exception

In a recent judgment, the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Surjeet Singh, an accused in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act case, underscoring the right to a speedy trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The court, presided by Justice Sandeep Moudgil, ruled that prolonged detention without trial would amount to a violation of constitutional rights, particularly when the trial is likely to be delayed.

Surjeet Singh was arrested in connection with FIR No. 156 dated August 6, 2023, under Section 22 of the NDPS Act, with Section 29 later added on August 9, 2023. The FIR was registered at Police Station Gurharsahai, District Ferozepur, following a tip-off from a secret informer that led to the apprehension of co-accused Lakhwinder Kumar. Surjeet Singh’s name surfaced in the investigation based solely on the disclosure statement of the co-accused, with no direct recovery from him. The petitioner had been in custody since February 30, 2024.

The court highlighted the constitutional mandate for a speedy trial, emphasizing that the petitioner's prolonged detention without significant progress in the trial was unjust. Justice Moudgil observed, "Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring a speedy trial is inconsistent with Article 21. The period of detention should not be unduly long, especially when the trial is likely to be prolonged." The court cited precedents from the Supreme Court, including Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar and Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, reinforcing the importance of expediting trials to prevent undue hardship to the accused.

Justice Moudgil referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reiterating that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. The court stressed that continuing to detain the petitioner without timely trial proceedings would violate his rights. Additionally, while acknowledging the petitioner’s involvement in other criminal cases, the court ruled that each case must be judged independently, with the focus on the evidence within that specific case.

Justice Moudgil remarked, "Sympathy for undertrials who are in jail for long terms due to trial delays must be balanced with the societal impact of the crime. However, this cannot justify indefinite detention without trial."

The judgment by the Punjab & Haryana High Court reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding constitutional rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial. The decision to grant bail in this case sets a significant precedent, emphasizing that the prolonged pre-trial detention of undertrials is a violation of their fundamental rights. This ruling is expected to influence future cases where trial delays are evident, pushing for swifter judicial processes to ensure justice is both timely and fair.

Date of Decision: July 30, 2024

Surjeet Singh vs. State of Punjab