Jail and bail under UAPA
- Recently, the Supreme Court denied bail to Gurwinder Singh, an accused in an alleged “Khalistan module.”
- This judgement highlights the stringent bail provisions within the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
Bail Provisions under UAPA
- Gurwinder Singh's arrest stemmed from his involvement in displaying banners advocating for Khalistan, leading to allegations of conspiracy with Sikhs for Justice, a proscribed pro-Khalistan group.
- Section 43D (5) of the UAPA outlines the criteria for bail, emphasizing that the accused individuals must show to the court that it is unreasonable to believe the accusations are prima facie true.
- This deviates from the principle of criminal law that a person is innocent till proven guilty.
Narrowing the room for Bail
- In the case of Zahoor Ahmed Shah Watali, the Supreme Court in 2019 confirmed that courts must accept the state’s case without examining its merits while granting bail.
- It directed courts not to analyse evidence or circumstances but look at the totality of the case presented by the state while deciding on bail petition.
- The judgement severely limited courts' ability to question the prosecution's case, raising concerns about individual liberty.
Recent Supreme Court Decisions
- In Union of India vs KA Najeeb, bail was allowed by the Supreme Court under UAPA after prolonged incarceration.
- It acknowledged that bail under UAPA is an exception but it needs to be balanced with the right to a speedy trial.
- The SC was of the view that the legislative policy against grant of bail would not hold ground if
- There is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable time and
- The period of incarceration already undergone has exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed sentence.
- However, in Vernon Gonsalves v State of Maharashtra, a different interpretation of the prima facie truth test was proposed.
- The test wouldn't be satisfied unless there's some basic analysis of the evidence's value during the bail examination, and the quality of evidence convinces the court of its worth.
- In the Gurwinder Singh case, the two-judge bench relied on the Watali ruling entirely without considering the Gonsalves ruling.
Future Prospects
- Since both the Watali and Gonsalves rulings came from benches with the same number of judges, it remains to be seen how future benches will use the test.
- If there's significant disagreement between different two-judge benches, a larger bench will need to settle the law.