Strictly implement SC directions on bail to undertrials in prolonged custody: Delhi High Court to district courts

The Delhi High Court has directed all district courts, prison authorities, and district legal services authorities in the national capital to strictly comply with the Supreme Court’s directions on releasing first-time offenders who have served more than one-third of their maximum sentence in jail [Rishabh Gehlot Vs State (NCT of Delhi)].

Justice Girish Kathpalia took note of a fact that accused are languishing in jails even after suffering incarceration for a period one-third or at times even more than that of the maximum period for which they can be sentenced.

The Court said that the authorities must ensure strict compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions regarding Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which provides for the conditional release of certain accused persons held in prolonged custody.

“A copy of this order be sent to all Principal District and Sessions Judges as well as the Director General (Prisons), Delhi with the directions to ensure strict compliance of the above mentioned directions of the Supreme Court [in the case of In Re:- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons]. A copy of this order be also sent to the Secretary, DHCLSC as well as to the Member Secretary, DLSA with the directions to take up such matters so that directions of the Supreme Court in this regard are complied with, in the letter and spirit," it directed.

The Court was hearing a bail application moved by one Rishabh, who is accused of cheating a woman and her daughter. The prosecution alleged that Rishabh impersonated one Shaurya on several occasions to dupe the mother-daughter duo of their money.

His counsel argued that he is entitled to bail as per the Supreme Court's directions pertaining to undertrial prisoners in its 2013 judgment titled ‘In Re:- Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons’.

In that case, the Supreme Court had directed that the courts shall grant bail to first-time offenders who have spent one-third of the maximum imprisonment as undertrial.

The Court agreed with the submission that Section 479 of BNSS mandates granting bail to the accused in such cases.

"Admittedly, the accused/applicant is a first time offender and has never been convicted of any offence in the past. The accused/applicant has spent more than 1/3rd of the maximum imposable sentence of 07 years incarceration in jail, so Section 479 BNSS comes into play," it said.

Further, the Court also questioned the authenticity of the investigation, noting that the investigating officer had tried to mislead it by wrongly pinning a co-accused’s incriminating audio recordings on Rishabh.

“At the outset, I must deprecate conduct on the part of the investigating agency in this case, as misleading status report," the Court said.

The Court also expressed surprise over the failure to arrest co-accused Nitin, who allegedly impersonated a CBI official to dupe the victims. Delhi Police has not been able to explain why out of the five accused persons, only Rishabh was arrested, the Court noted.

“Of course, it is the prerogative of the investigator to arrest or not to arrest an accused. But in the factual matrix of the present kind, such conduct on the part of the investigating agency raises unanswered questions, to say the least,” it added.

The Court also took into account the fact that charges were yet to be framed against Rishabh and that further investigation was still ongoing. Considering these circumstances, the Court granted bail to the accused.

Senior Advocate Amit Chadha with advocates Kunal Sharma, Puneet Rathor, Mohit Singh, Atin Chadha, M Chadha, Harjas Singh, Rekha Yadav, A Singh and Ankush Sharma appeared for the accused.

Additional Public Prosecutor Amit Ahlawat appeared for the State.

Advocates Deepak Tiwari and Saksham Upadhyay appeared for the complainant.

[Read Judgment]