Over 100 law professionals write to SC and Delhi HC condemning the inordinate delay in granting them bail
Team Clarion
NEW DELHI – Condemning the inordinate judicial delays in deciding bail applications of Muslim activists involved in protests against the CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act), over a hundred lawyers and law professionals have called on the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court to ensure that their bail pleas are decided within two weeks.
In a joint statement issued under the banner of the National Alliance for Justice Accountability and Rights (NAJAR) on Thursday, the law experts expressed deep concerns over the judicial delays in deciding the bail applications of the activists named in the conspiracy case related to the 2020 riots in northeast Delhi. According to the statement, out of 18 activists jailed in the case, only six were granted bail.
Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-ur-Rahman, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shadaba Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed and Tahir Hussain continue to be languishing in prison for the last four years.
“Of the 18 people arrested in the case, only six are reported to have received bail so far. The others are facing multiple concerns – either their judgments are being reserved but not passed, or, judges are being transferred after the hearing, or are recusing themselves. This has led to undue and unjust delays in the process of hearing and disposal of bail applications,” reads the statement.
The signatories to the statement are legal luminaries from across the country including lawyers from the Supreme Court, high courts of Delhi and other states, law professionals, and activists.
Describing the prolonged delays in deciding the bail applications as an “absolute travesty of justice”, the NAJAR statement said: “In some cases, judges have recused themselves from hearing the matters and in others, judges were transferred and have left without pronouncing a verdict. The numerous adjournments numbering up to 60-70 in most cases, raise serious questions about the accountability of the judiciary. We are of the concerted view that ‘Process has become Punishment’ for all these law-abiding activists and that these delays tantamount to infringement of their fundamental rights to liberty and speedy disposals”.
The statement also gave details related to the listing of their applications and the changing of benches in the case. Most of the bail applications were listed between 50-73 times while the benches were changed between 4-8 times.
According to the lawyers, these delays are mainly due to the following reasons: non-application of precedence of granting bail to other activists in the same case. The judgements which granted bail to other activists such as Natasha Narwal, Asif Tanha and others are not being applied to the remaining jailed activists in the same case.
Lawyers noted that Gulfisha, Khalid Saifi, Athar, Meeran s Shadab filed applications before the Delhi High Court for the Supreme Court’s order to be taken on record in their bail applications, to seek bail on the ground of parity. However, the bench either did not assemble or adjourned all listed hearings during the next four months until 16th October 23 when Justice Mridul was transferred to Manipur High Court.
Adjournments, recusal, change of benches: The High Court Bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar began the bail hearings in Umar Khalid’s petition which was heard over multiple hearings for almost 4 months. On 18 October 23, it rejected Khalid’s bail application.
Reserved Order: After rejecting Umar Khalid’s bail, the bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar heard other bail applications for almost a year but merely reserved orders/judgments without passing them.
Transfer of Judge: Justice Mridul was subsequently transferred and all the bail pleas were required to be re-heard by a new bench. On 1st November 23, the bail pleas were listed before the special bench of Justices Suresh Kait and Manoj Jain. Before pronouncing the judgement, Justice Kait was transferred to the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.
Recusal: The matters were listed before the Bench of Justices Pratibha M Singh and Amit Sharma, but the latter recused himself from hearing the pleas. The new bench will only be known by the next hearing date, 26 August.
Hence, the lawyers appealed to the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court to ensure that the bail petitions of all the accused in the equal citizenship cases (FIR 5G/2020) are heard and decided within two weeks at the most.
They also demanded direct immediate payment of appropriate compensation to the accused and their families, for the inordinate delays in these bail matters and institute a fair judicial system, so that in the event of transfer/elevation, judges are required to pass orders in bail matters, where the hearing has been concluded or judgement has been reserved.
