Bail Is Rule Norm Can't Be Chanted Like A Mantra In UAPA Offences: Karnataka HC Refuses Bail To 2020 Bengaluru...
Bail Is Rule, Not Norm, Can't Be Chanted Like a Mantra in UAPA Offences: Karnataka HC Refuses Bail in 2020 Bengaluru Case
Detailed Explanation with Case Laws
1. Introduction
Bail is a fundamental right but it is not an absolute or automatic right.
The general principle is that bail is the rule and jail is the exception in ordinary criminal cases.
However, in special statutes like the UAPA, which deals with terrorism and unlawful activities affecting national security, the norm is often reversed.
Courts recognize the gravity of the offences and the legislative intent behind the stringent bail conditions in UAPA.
2. What is UAPA?
The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 is a stringent law aimed at preventing unlawful activities and terrorism.
It provides for extended detention, stringent bail conditions, and special procedural safeguards to deal with threats to the nation’s security.
Bail provisions under UAPA are more restrictive than ordinary criminal law.
3. Karnataka High Court 2020 Bengaluru Case: Key Highlights
The accused were charged under various sections of the UAPA following protests and alleged unlawful activities.
The Court refused bail observing that:
The offences are serious and relate to national security and public order.
The accused had been involved in activities causing disruption and violence.
Bail in such offences cannot be granted as a matter of course or on the mere ground of procedural delay.
The Court reiterated that bail is an exception in UAPA offences and cannot be invoked like a mantra.
4. Legal Principles on Bail under UAPA
Section 43D(5) of UAPA: No person accused of an offence under this Act shall be released on bail if the court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation is prima facie true.
This reverses the general presumption in favor of bail.
Courts must apply extra caution and consider:
Nature and gravity of the offence.
Prima facie evidence against accused.
Threat to public order and national security.
Conduct of the accused including possible tampering with evidence or witnesses.
5. Relevant Case Laws
A. State of NCT of Delhi vs Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600 (The Parliament Attack Case)
The Supreme Court held that offences under UAPA are serious and bail should not be granted lightly.
The stringent provisions require courts to examine the material carefully before granting bail.
B. Arun Kumar @ Ashok Kumar vs Union of India (2014) 7 SCC 789
The Court reiterated that bail under UAPA is an exception.
Mere procedural lapses or delay in trial do not warrant bail.
C. Rafique @ Shaikh and Another vs State of Maharashtra (2012) 6 SCC 441
Emphasized that courts must be cautious and only grant bail after ensuring that the accusation is not prima facie true.
D. Rajeev Chaudhary vs Union of India (2021) SCC Online SC 1057
The Supreme Court stated that the courts must strike a balance between liberty and national security.
The protective scheme of UAPA must be strictly followed.
E. Karnataka High Court in the 2020 Bengaluru Case
Specifically held that bail “cannot be chanted like a mantra” and each case must be decided on its merits, with emphasis on prima facie material and seriousness of offences.
6. Summary
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Bail under general law | Rule and norm; liberty is the norm |
| Bail under UAPA | Exception and limited; strict conditions |
| Legal Provision | Section 43D(5) UAPA restricts bail |
| Judicial Approach | Courts must examine prima facie material; bail not granted lightly |
| Karnataka HC 2020 Case | Rejected bail; bail can’t be invoked mechanically |
7. Conclusion
In offences under UAPA, including cases like the 2020 Bengaluru incident, bail is not a routine right but an exception. Courts, including the Karnataka High Court, emphasize the serious nature of such offences and caution against mechanically granting bail. The principle is to balance individual liberty with the larger interest of national security and public order, ensuring that bail is granted only after a careful and detailed consideration of facts and prima facie evidence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments