Right To Speedy Trial Not Defeated By Gravity Of Offence; Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention Becomes Punishment: Supreme Court

The right to a speedy trial, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, is not eclipsed by the nature of the offence, the Supreme Court held, observing that prolonged incarceration of an undertrial, without commencement or reasonable progress of trial, effectively converts pre-trial detention into a form of punishment. The Court made these observations while granting bail to former Amtek Auto promoter Arvind Dham in a money-laundering case.The Court, relying on the judgment in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, underscored that if the State, any prosecuting agency, or even the court concerned has no wherewithal to secure or protect an accused's fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21, then the State or such agency cannot oppose a plea for bail merely on the ground that the alleged crime is serious.Allowing the appeal and setting aside the Delhi High Court's order denying bail, a Bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sanjay Kumar ordered the release of Dham on bail in proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.Dham has been in custody since July 9, 2024. The Court noted that although prosecution complaints had been filed, cognizance had not yet been taken and the matter remained at the stage of scrutiny of documents. A total of 210 prosecution witnesses had been cited, and there was no realistic likelihood of the trial commencing in the near future.Economic Offences Not A Homogeneous ClassRejecting the argument that the gravity of economic offences alone justified prolonged incarceration, the Court reiterated that economic offences cannot be treated as a homogeneous class warranting blanket denial of bail. The Bench observed that under the PMLA, where the maximum sentence is seven years, statutory restrictions cannot be allowed to result in indefinite pre-trial detention in violation of Article 21.The right to speedy trial, enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, is not eclipsed by the nature of the offence. Prolonged incarceration of an undertrial, without commencement or reasonable progress of trial, cannot be countenanced, as it has the effect of converting pretrial detention into form of punishment.Relying on a consistent line of precedent, including Manish Sisodia, Padam Chand Jain and V. Senthil Balaji, the Court emphasised that prolonged incarceration pending trial, especially where evidence is largely documentary and already in the custody of the prosecution, weighs decisively in favour of bail.Delay Attributable To Enforcement DirectorateSignificantly, the Court found that substantial delay in the proceedings was attributable to the Enforcement Directorate itself. After the Special Court issued notice to proposed accused persons in September 2024, the ED challenged that order before the High Court, resulting in an eight-month stay of proceedings. The petition was eventually withdrawn in May 2025, but the trial had already been stalled for a considerable period.The Court rejected allegations that Dham had influenced witnesses or dissipated proceeds of crime, noting that the principal witness was arrayed much after his arrest and that no material linked him to the alleged sale of attached properties.Reaffirming constitutional first principles, the judgment authored by Justice Aradhe held that Article 21 applies irrespective of the nature of the crime. If the justice system is unable to ensure a timely trial, continued incarceration of an undertrial cannot be justified by invoking the seriousness of allegations alone.Economic offences, by their very nature, may differ in degree and fact, and therefore cannot be treated as homogeneous class warranting a blanket denial of bail.Accordingly, the Court quashed the High Court's order and directed Dham's release on bail, subject to conditions to be fixed by the trial court, including surrender of passport and restrictions on travel.Case : Arvind Dham v Directorate of EnforcementCitation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 7Click here to read the judgment

Right To Speedy Trial Not Defeated By Gravity Of Offence; Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention Becomes Punishment: Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags