Prolonged Incarceration Undermines Right To Life, Conditional Liberty Must Override Bail Restrictions Under MCOCA: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that conditional liberty must override the statutory restrictions on grant of bail under Section 21 of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). Justice Amit Mahajan observed that despite the stringent requirements imposed on an accused for bail, such requirements do not preclude the grant of bail on the grounds of undue delay in the completion of the trial. “Various courts have recognized that prolonged incarceration undermines the right to life and liberty, as has been guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, conditional liberty must take precedence over the statutory restrictions under Section 21 of MCOCA and override the bar therein,” the Court said.The Court granted bail to one Rajesh Kumar alias Raje in an FIR registered by the Special Cell in 2018 for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. A raid was conducted and the accused was apprehended with 3 Kg of Heroin. It was alleged that during the time of apprehension, the accused was travelling in a car registered in the name of a co-accused who was allegedly a notorious criminal with 20 involvements under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. As per the case of the prosecution, the accused allegedly disclosed names of other associates of the syndicate, leading to further arrests and drug seizures. The counsel for the accused submitted that the accused was merely employed as a driver of the co-accused and had no knowledge of the contraband recovered from the vehicle.Bail was sought on the ground of delay in trial and the period of incarceration of the accused. It was argued that the provisions of MCOCA were erroneously invoked against the accused.The bail was opposed by the Special Public Prosecutor on the ground that the allegations were serious in nature. It was submitted that the trial may be expedited instead of granting any relief to the accused.Allowing the plea, the Court noted that the accused had spent more than six years years in custody, despite which, the matter was still at the stage of examination of prosecution witnesses and only 11 out of 100 witnesses were examined.“Speedy trial in such a case does not seem to be a possibility and the trial is likely going to take a long time to conclude,” the Court said. It added that the activities of the alleged syndicate did not lead to death and therefore, the minimum sentence for the alleged offences will be only 5 years. The Court noted that while any comment on the potential sentence that may be awarded in the case would be premature, it could not be ignored that the accused had spent much more time in custody than 05 years and that the trial was unlikely to be concluded in near future.“It is not the case of the prosecution that the applicant is the kingpin of the alleged syndicate. It is pertinent to note that the applicant has already been enlarged on bail in the case under NDPS Act and acquitted in the other case that was registered against him,” the Court said. It noted that the nominal roll of the accused reflected that his conduct was satisfactory and he had not misused the liberty when he was enlarged on interim bail on a previous occasion.“In such circumstances, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for grant of bail on the ground of prolonged delay in the trial,” the Court said. “It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and should not influence the outcome of the Trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case,” it added.Counsel for Applicant: Mr. Akshay Bhandari, Mr. Anmol Sachdeva, Mr. Kushal Kumar, Ms. Meghna Saroa & Mr. Janak Raj Ambawat, AdvsCounsel for Respondent: Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, SC with Ms. Samridhi Dobhal, Mr. Krishna Mohan Chandel & Mr. Hrithik Maurya, AdvsTitle: RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS RAJE v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHICitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 543Click here to read order

Prolonged Incarceration Undermines Right To Life, Conditional Liberty Must Override Bail Restrictions Under MCOCA: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags