- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Registers Suo Motu...
Supreme Court Registers Suo Motu Case On Long Pendency Of Criminal Appeals In Allahabad High Court
Shruti Kakkar
5 Oct 2021 6:21 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Tuesday registered a suo motu case on the issue of long pendency of criminal appeals in the Allahabad High Court. The Court is considering laying down of guidelines regarding grant of bail to convicts who have undergone long years of sentence due to delay in hearing of their criminal appeals.A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh ordered...
The Supreme Court on Tuesday registered a suo motu case on the issue of long pendency of criminal appeals in the Allahabad High Court. The Court is considering laying down of guidelines regarding grant of bail to convicts who have undergone long years of sentence due to delay in hearing of their criminal appeals.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh ordered the registration of the suo motu case, after noting that the suggestions given by the Allahabad High Court in its affidavit are "cumbersome".
The bench had earlier sought for the response of the Allahabad High Court on the issue, while considering a petition seeking suspension of sentence filed by a convict. The bench had noted that the several convicts are approaching the Supreme Court seeking suspension of sentence as criminal appeals are not being taken up for hearing by the Allahabad High Court.
Following that, both the High Court and the State of Uttar Pradesh filed affidavits giving suggestions for early hearing of criminal appeals.
"Affidavit has been filed by High Court where they have agreed with the proposals listed as criteria for bail by the Government. We have perused the affidavit & in our view the suggestions are more cumbersome. If the appeal is pending before High Court & if the person has undergone 8 years, then in most cases bail should be granted, despite that matter is not coming up. There may be convicts who may not be able to have requested access to legal aid for moving bail applications. High Court must explore the cases where the accused has undergone a sentence of 8 years can be considered for grant of bail", the Supreme Court noted in its order.
"We are also conscious of the scenario where the appeal comes up for hearing and the appellant may be seeking adjournment rather than argue. That will certainly not be the case for a grant of bail where the court has to deal with merits. We are also of the view that convict must reach High Court first since this court is already burdened. But there must be a mechanism that if the accused reaches there, the appeal must be heard promptly", the order further stated.
The bench observed that there must be a mechanism that if the accused reaches there, the appeal must be heard promptly.
The bench therefore issued a direction to the High Court to place before the Supreme Court a policy in this regard within 4 weeks. The bench suggested that in cases of life imprisonment where the convict has undergone half the sentence, grant of bail can be considered.
"We note that there may be convicts in custody in life sentence cases and in such cases when 50 percent of sentence is undergone it can be the basis of grant of bail. We grant 4 weeks to High Court to place before us the policy in this regard".
"The matters should be placed before the HC's promptly so that their matters are heard promptly. In order to facilitate further aspects, a separate suo moto petition can be listed before the court for further directions. The Registry to register suo moto proceedings & place it before the court on Nov 16, 2021", the bench ordered.
Affidavit Submitted By Allahabad High Court
Pursuant to issuance of notice, Allahabad High Court in its affidavit filed before the Supreme Court had submitted that in matters where criminal appeal has been pending for a long time before Allahabad High Court, a 'victim impact assessment report' detailing the physical, social and mental impact of the crime on the victim should be taken into account for serious and grave offences.
The High Court had also suggested for preparation of a victim impact assessment report in consultation with the victim in cases where the accused has served actual sentences or long tenure in jails to examine the impact of grant of bail on the victim.
Furthermore, the High Court had also submitted that in consonance with Supreme Court judgments, life sentence should be considered for "entire life" only and that if an accused of heinous crime is released on bail after spending 10 to 15 years in jail then "he will never make an effort for deciding his appeal early."
In the affidavit submitted, the High Court had also talked about need for creation of special benches for deciding long pending criminal appeals. It was also stated that convicts should not have the benefit of bail in a "mechanical manner".
The High Court also suggested a different yardstick for the grant of bail to convicts in white collar or organized crimes due to them being habitual and hardened criminals who committed crimes in a planned and sophisticated manner.
The High Court also said that it was approving the suggestion given by the State Government on the criteria to categorize the appeals for prioritizing bail hearings.
Report of the suggestions submitted by the State of Uttar Pradesh
In compliance of Court's order dated July 26 calling the State to give suggestions, the State of Uttar Pradesh in its note had laid down two broad criterion that could be taken into consideration while considering bail plea:
- The total period of actual imprisonment undergone
- Period of pendency of criminal appear
The following suggestions were suggested within such category:
- Heinous nature of crime
- Past conduct and criminal history- Bail Inquiry
- Deliberate delay in pursuing appeal
- Appellant-Convict to approach the High Court at the first instance
Court room exchange today
The Supreme Court today asked if the suggestions have been approved after applying mind.
"I don't know how much mind has been applied on the suggestions. Here we are dealing with the people who are languishing in jail & their criminal appeals are not listed.How much time does it take for a bail matter to come up?", Justice Kaul asked Advocate Yashwardhan, who appeared for the High Court.
Justice Kaul said that the suggestions of the state are too wide and if they are accepted, the process will become "cumbersome".
"As a High Court you will have to take care of this. That will affect your role. You can have one or two more benches & clear the backlog related to suspension. We can't just keep the suspension applications pending for longer time. That'll be violation of Art 21 & that'll be High Court cutting the relief", Justice Sundresh commented.
"Our apprehension is that the suggestions that have been given by the AAG(Additional Advocate General) are more cumbersome. That is state's perspective. All murder appeals where people have undergone 8 years & appeal is pending, you should take that up first. Both the State & HC should see that all those matters should be taken up first. The problem is not accorss the country. This is the problem more specific to some states & Allahabad High Court. This is your problem. All these matters are coming from your HC. You are not offering solution when you say that you are accepting Govt's suggestions", Justice Kaul added.
"These suggestions are too cumbersome for the Court to accept. Someone will have to apply mind", Justice Kaul further said.\
The High Court's counsel said that he will take instructions on the bench's queries and observations.
Senior Advocate Viraj R Datar, who appeared for the petitioner, submitted that the suggestions of the High Court and the Government were not feasible.
Additional Advocate General Garima Prashad appeared for the UP Government.
(Report is based on the oral hearing and the order dictated in the court. To be updated after the order is uploaded).
