Chandigarh, March 7 – The Punjab and Haryana High Court has strongly criticized the prolonged incarceration of an undertrial prisoner for more than four years, despite his legal right to default bail, calling it a grave violation of fundamental rights.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, in a scathing order, rebuked the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and jail authorities for failing to secure the petitioner’s release, stating that their inaction effectively turned pre-trial detention into punishment.
The petitioner, facing charges that carry a maximum sentence of five years, had already spent four years, one month, and 20 days behind bars. Despite the complaint being filed in 2022, the trial had not yet commenced, the court noted.
‘Bail Cannot Be a Privilege for the Wealthy’
Justice Brar took issue with the stringent bail conditions imposed by the lower court, which required two surety bonds of ₹1.10 crore each and a ₹55 lakh bank guarantee.
“A surety bond of such exorbitant value cannot be deemed reasonable in good conscience, as it effectively places a monetary price on liberty,” the court remarked, ruling that such conditions violated the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court underlined that bail is intended to ensure an accused person’s presence at trial, not to function as an indirect denial of their freedom. Judicial custody, Justice Brar reiterated, is preventive, not punitive, and should only be a last resort.
DLSA, Jail Authorities Under Fire
The court also slammed the DLSA for failing to assist the petitioner in obtaining bail or compiling a socio-economic report to justify easing the conditions. Jail authorities were similarly faulted for not informing the court of the petitioner’s eligibility for release under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS).
“The petitioner has been condemned unheard, languishing in custody for over four years without even the framing of charges. This is a stark negation of his fundamental right to a fair trial,” the court stated.
Citing the Supreme Court ruling in Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, Justice Brar reaffirmed that default bail is not just a statutory provision but a constitutional right under Article 21.
“The right to life and personal liberty cannot be reduced to a privilege based on financial status,” the court asserted, directing the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing bonds worth ₹50,000 with one surety of the same amount.
