High Courts Are Issuing Such Directions Knowing That Criminal Courts In State Have Huge Pendency: SC Takes Exception To Direction For Concluding Trial In A Year
The Supreme Court remarked that it was surprising to find that the Patna High Court had directed the completion of the trial within one year without even considering that every criminal Court in the State of Bihar will have a huge pendency.
The Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih observed, “On 28th February, 2024 while rejecting the bail application, the High Court directed that the trial shall be concluded within a period of one year. We are surprised to note that notwithstanding the decision of the Constitution Bench in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. & Ors.1 (2024) INSC 150, the High Courts are issuing such directions without even considering that every criminal Court in the State of Bihar will have huge pendency.”
AOR Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Advocate Raja Choudhary appeared for the Appellant whereas AOR Azmat Hayat Amanullah and Advocate Nitya Sharma appeared for the Respondent.
An appeal was filed by the accused assailing the order rejecting the bail application filed by him before the Patna High Court.
The Court also noted that all the offences against the appellant were triable by a Court of the Judicial Magistrate and the charge-sheet was also filed.
The Counsel for the State contended that the appellant was arrested in August 2023, and even the High Court recorded that the appellant was in custody since June 24, 2023, therefore, a case was made out for enlarging the appellant on bail, pending trial.
The Court referred to the judgment given by the Constitution Bench in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. & Ors., which while overruling its judgment in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited v. Central Bureau of Investigation, has issued guidelines on the procedure to be adopted by High Courts in passing interim order of stay of proceedings and for dealing with the applications for vacating interim stay.
Accordingly, the Appeal was allowed.
Cause Title: Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar
Appearances:
Appellant: AOR Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Advocates Raja Choudhary, Gaurav Ujjawal, Jatin Bhardwaj, Gaurav Khosala and Babu Malayi.
Respondent: AOR Azmat Hayat Amanullah, Advocates Nitya Sharma, Rebecca Mishra, Bhavesh Yadav, Neha Buttan, Ashish Kumar Patel, Siddharth Bhardwaj, Yukta Garg, Ravish Kumar Sinha, Khushboo Takyar, Angad Singh, and Neeraj.
