Judiciary is answerable to accused in jail when there is no speedy trial: Bombay High Court

Judiciary is answerable to accused when fair and speedy trial is denied, the Bombay High Court recently observed after noting the delay by a special court hearing cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), to start a trial even after passage of more than a year [Abdul Nasir Bhai Miya Shaikh vs Union of India].Single-judge Justice Bharati Dangre expressed its displeasure at the slow pace of the proceedings before the NDPS court, stating that it did not follow the High Court's direction to commence trial within six months and in fact did nothing for a year. "Speedy justice being identified as an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the judicial system is also answerable to the accused who are incarcerated, though no serious charges but what is bare minimum expected from this system is a fair and speedy trial," the Court said in an order passed on September 5..The Court was hearing a bail plea filed by one Abdul Nasir Bhai Miya Shaikh arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) on February 4, 2018. He had moved a bail application before the High Court which was withdrawn after the Court ordered the special court to expedite the trial.The High Court had in April 2021 specifically ordered the special court hearing Shaikh's case to complete the framing of charges and commence trial in the case within six months.However, the bench was irked to note that despite its orders nothing much happened in the case. In fact, the charges were framed after three months of the High Court's order and after that an accused in the case had filed for medical bail and then a regular bail.Justice Dangre noted that the special court did not commence the trial even till September 3, when the case was last listed."This depicts the sorrow state of affairs as the applicant remained incarcerated since February 4, 2018 and more than four years have expired and still the trial is proceeding at a snail pace. From April 2021 till September 2022, more than a period of one year and four months has passed but the trial has not moved even in inch," the Court observed..The judge further noted that there are around 15 witnesses in the case and yet the trial court was proceeding at a snail's pace. She, therefore, called for a report from the special court seeking an explanation as to why such leniency was granted to the prosecution and to the accused who had moved medical bail application..Justice Dangre also sought the details of the pending cases before the concerned special court."Let it also submit the number of NDPS cases which are pending before it along with the year since when they are pending. The concerned Judge shall also submit the number of High Court and Supreme Court expedited trials which are pending before the Court. Let such a report come within a period of two weeks," Justice Dangre ordered..The matter will be heard next on September 19, 2022..Advocate Ayaz Khan appeared for the Applicant.Advocates Shreeram Shirsat, Amandeep Singh, Nishi Singhvi and Anna Oommen represented the NCB.Additional Public Prosecutor Rutuja Ambekar appeared for the State..[Read Order]