Karnataka High Court seeks details from sessions courts on status of pending UAPA cases

The Karnataka High Court recently directed the Registrar General of the High Court to seek details from sessions courts about the various stages at which cases registered under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act [UAPA] are pending..A Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas passed this direction in a plea by one Vaseemuddin seeking establishment of an additional UAPA court in the State..During the hearing, the petitioner Advocate Mohammed Tahir submitted that in many cases, trial have been pending for over 12 years..He urged the Court to pass an order under section 309 ( Power to postpone or adjourn proceedings) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)..However, the Court refused to do so, opining that,"We cannot pass an order under section 309. 309 is an ideal provision but we don't live in an ideal world.".As the hearing of the matter progressed, the Court was apprised that there are 56 cases registered under the UAPA which are pending.."Why do you need a special Court? Look at the number of pending cases.. ", queried the Court.."In spite of the number of cases, trial is pending," Tahir replied..The petition in this regard stated that despite provisions for speedy trial , witnesses are not being examined promptly nor is there any pressure put on prosecution by the presiding judges to speed up the trial. "It is submitted that being mere accused in case related with the UAPA cases, the accused are treated as special class of accused and every stage from investigation to charge to recording of evidence and completion of trial takes considerable time..... Unfortunately, inspite of express provision in section 309 of CrPC and section 19 of the NIA of speedy trial or day to day trial, presiding officers neither press investigating agency to promptly present the witnesses nor press prosecutors to proceed with the trial which add into the misery of accused," the petition said. .The petitioner further submitted that couple of UAPA cases are pending before the 34th Additional City Civil Court which sits only once a week. It was the petitioner's case that it would take years for the completion of the UAPA cases, even if it sits every week..This is gross violation of right to speedy trial which is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioner argued. .Therefore, a special Court which exclusively deals with UAPA cases is essential, the petition contended..On these grounds, the petition sought direction to the State to constitute one more additional session court to deal with pending UAPA cases..The Supreme Court had recently granted bail to a UAPA accused who had spent more than 5 years in jail as undertrial. The top court while granting bail had noted that liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution includes within its ambit access to justice and right to speedy trial. .The Supreme Court while accepting the bar under Section 43D(5) of UAPA against grant of bail, made it clear that the provision does not oust the jurisdiction of Constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights.