Undertrial Cannot Be Detained In Jail Indefinitely: SC
The principle “Undertrial Cannot Be Detained in Jail Indefinitely” as established by the Supreme Court of India,
1. Legal Principle
The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly held that:
Undertrials (persons accused of a crime but not yet convicted) cannot be kept in jail indefinitely.
Detention must be reasonable and cannot be used as a substitute for investigation or trial delays.
The right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution protects an undertrial from unnecessary or prolonged detention.
This principle is rooted in human dignity, fairness in criminal justice, and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
2. Relevant Constitutional Provisions
Article 21 – Protection of Life and Personal Liberty:
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
The Supreme Court interprets this as forbidding arbitrary or indefinite detention.
Section 436 CrPC – Bail:
The Code of Criminal Procedure mandates that under certain circumstances, undertrials should be released on bail, especially if trial is delayed.
3. Leading Supreme Court Cases
a) Dinesh Batra vs. Union of India (1981)
Facts: Petition challenging prolonged detention of undertrials without trial.
Observation: The SC emphasized that detention without trial violates Article 21.
Principle: Undertrials must be either tried within a reasonable time or released on bail.
b) Hussainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar (1979)
Facts: Hundreds of undertrials in Bihar were languishing in jail for years, some longer than the maximum sentence for the alleged crime.
Judgment:
Indefinite detention of undertrials is unconstitutional.
Court ordered the release of undertrials who had served longer than the maximum sentence for the offenses they were charged with.
Principle: The SC called prolonged undertrial detention a violation of Article 21 and a neglect of human rights.
c) Sheela Barse vs. State of Maharashtra (1983)
Facts: Addressed the issue of undertrial prisoners in jails.
Judgment: SC issued directions for speedy trial and better prison administration.
Principle: Ensured monitoring of undertrial detention and emphasized judicial oversight.
4. Key Takeaways
Presumption of Innocence: Undertrials are presumed innocent until proven guilty; their indefinite detention is a violation of constitutional rights.
Speedy Trial: The criminal justice system must ensure trials are conducted within a reasonable time.
Bail Preference: Courts should grant bail liberally to undertrials, particularly where trial delay is due to systemic issues.
Human Rights Compliance: Indefinite detention constitutes arbitrary deprivation of liberty and is inconsistent with international human rights norms.
5. Practical Implications
States must maintain a record of undertrial prisoners and their detention periods.
Police and prosecutors cannot use delay in investigation as an excuse to detain undertrials indefinitely.
Judicial authorities must review undertrial cases periodically to prevent constitutional violations.
Summary:
The Supreme Court has made it clear that an undertrial cannot remain in jail indefinitely. If the trial is delayed, undertrials should either be released on bail or their trial must be expedited. This ensures protection of Article 21 rights and aligns with the principles of fairness and human dignity.
RELATED Blog
0 comments