5 months ago
1
The Supreme Court connected Friday granted bail to a 55-year-old tribal man, taking superior objection to the Assam Police keeping him successful custody for 2 years without filing a chargesheet.
Terming his prolonged incarceration arsenic “wholly unjustified”, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta pulled up the Assam Police for failing to record the chargesheet wrong the statutory play prescribed nether the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
“For 2 years, you did not record the chargesheet, and the antheral has been successful custody? This is, successful fact, amerciable custody. You see yourself to beryllium the premier investigating bureau of the country?” the Bench remarked, addressing advocator Shubhojit Roy who appeared for the Assam Government.
Mr. Roy submitted that the accused, Tonlong Konyak, was a Myanmar nationalist and had been recovered successful possession of counterfeit Indian currency portion crossing the border. He argued that Section 43D(7) of the UAPA imposes a statutory barroom connected granting bail to a idiosyncratic who is not an Indian national and has entered the state illegally, but successful exceptional circumstances.
Dismissing specified a contention, Justice Mehta observed, “Whatever beryllium the stringent provisions nether UAPA, the instrumentality does not supply for amerciable custody. This is appalling.”
The Bench further noted that the petitioner had already been granted default bail successful 2 connected cases successful which the chargesheet was not filed wrong the prescribed period. It added that nether Section 43D(2)(a) of the UAPA, the play for completing an probe whitethorn beryllium extended lone up to a maximum of 180 days, and lone done a judicial order, expressly signaling the grounds for specified extension.
‘Indefinite custody’
Justice Mehta past asked the State counsel what had prevented the constabulary from filing the chargesheet, pointing retired that an accused would ordinarily beryllium entitled to statutory bail if the probe is not completed wrong the mandated period. Mr. Roy responded that respective co-accused were absconding, which had delayed the investigation.
“You cannot support a idiosyncratic successful custody for an indefinite period. If the chargesheet is not filed wrong the stipulated play nether the law, helium has to beryllium granted default bail,” Justice Mehta said.
The apex tribunal was proceeding Mr. Konyak’s petition challenging a December 20, 2024, ruling of the Gauhati High Court, which had denied him bail connected the crushed that helium was not an Indian national and had entered the state without immoderate authorisation.
According to the prosecution, Mr. Konyak was arrested connected the Nagaland borderline by the Assam Rifles connected July 23, 2023, aft helium was allegedly recovered carrying ₹3,25,000 successful extorted wealth portion travelling towards Myanmar. He was aboriginal booked nether provisions of the IPC and the UAPA for purported links with the banned United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA-Independent).
Disputing these allegations, advocator Shahrukh Alam submitted that helium belonged to the Konyak people of Nagaland, which is indigenous to the borderline region, and that, astatine the clip of his arrest, the country was governed by the Free Movement Regime (FMR) betwixt India and Myanmar. The FMR permitted members of borderline tribes to question up to 16 km into each other’s territory without a passport oregon visa.
“My Lords, delight enactment that the petitioner has been successful custody since 2023, and a chargesheet was filed lone connected July 31 this year,” Ms. Alam said.
Accordingly, the Bench observed that the petitioner deserved the “indulgence” of bail, peculiarly erstwhile determination was nary likelihood of the proceedings concluding successful the adjacent future. “Evidently, the petitioner has been detained for astir 2 years without the chargesheet being filed. In our opinion, the custody of the petitioner for specified a prolonged play without the chargesheet being filed was perfectly unjustified,” it held.
It further noted that adjacent a preliminary introspection of the chargesheet revealed that neither was immoderate incriminating worldly recovered from the petitioner, nor was determination immoderate nonstop grounds linking him to acts of extortion.
The petitioner had argued that the allegations levelled against him lacked immoderate substantive evidentiary foundation, rendering his continued detention arbitrary and violative of his cardinal rights. “The Hon’ble High Court erred successful not considering the information that adjacent if the Petitioner were a overseas national, helium is inactive entitled to adjacent extortion of laws nether Article 14 and the cardinal close to beingness and idiosyncratic liberty nether Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the petition, filed done advocator Akriti Chaubey, stated.
It added that a catena of Supreme Court judgments has consistently held that the close to bail cannot beryllium denied connected the crushed of nationality and that idiosyncratic liberty cannot beryllium curtailed without conscionable and tenable cause.
