New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a landmark ruling, directing the Chief Justices of all High Courts to review pending cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other similar laws, and to take practical steps to ensure that these cases are heard promptly.
The verdict was pronounced by a two-judge bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh during the hearing of an appeal filed by the CBI challenging the bail granted to accused in the 2010 Jnaneswari Express derailment case in West Midnapore, West Bengal.
The court stressed that the true measure of a democracy lies not in how it treats the unquestionably innocent, but in how it safeguards the rights of those merely suspected of wrongdoing. It observed that in cases where the law places the responsibility on the accused to prove their innocence, the justice system must ensure that the accused are not left struggling under a presumption of guilt, but are provided with fair opportunities and support to seek truth and justice.
The Supreme Court instructed High Courts to examine the number of pending cases under such laws and determine whether a sufficient number of special courts have been designated to handle them. Where special courts are not in place, High Courts must evaluate if the existing Sessions courts can manage the workload, and if not, they should raise the issue with the relevant authorities.
The court further emphasized that shortages of judges and staff, as well as other administrative obstacles, often cause delays. Trial courts are required to submit regular reports detailing why cases have remained pending for years and the current status of each case.
The bench also directed that trials under these laws should proceed on a day-to-day basis, allowing adjournments only in exceptional circumstances. Administrative judges appointed by High Courts are to seek reports from trial judges every four weeks to ensure compliance with these directives.
Highlighting the impact of procedural delays, the court noted that long-pending UAPA cases increase hardships for the accused. Overburdened courts, slow prosecution, and frequent adjournments by lawyers often leave an accused’s freedom trapped under the weight of pending cases.
Finally, the Supreme Court underlined that justice institutions must act as active guarantors of fairness, ensuring that accused persons have proper access to legal counsel and that the presumption of guilt does not transform into punishment before the trial concludes.