Supreme Court: Lockdown won’t disentitle accused from default bail

The court said “the sting” of the ADM Jabalpur judgment “and retrograde steps taken in respect of right protected under Article 21 was... immediately remedied by the Parliament by way of the Forty-fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978”.

india lockdown, coronaviru, madras hc, supreme court, indian express

The court was hearing an appeal by one S Kasi against the High Court order on the May 11. (Representational)

The Supreme Court on Friday disagreed with a finding of the Madurai bench of Madras High Court that the lockdown in wake of the pandemic “is akin to the proclamation of emergency” and would disentitle an accused from default bail. The court reminded the ADM, Jabalpur, ruling of the top court in 1976, which took a similar view, no longer held forte.

The court said “the sting” of the ADM Jabalpur judgment “and retrograde steps taken in respect of right protected under Article 21 was… immediately remedied by the Parliament by way of the Forty-fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978”.

The amendment said fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 cannot be suspended during the proclamation of Emergency.

“The view of the learned Single Judge that the restrictions… imposed during period of lockdown by the Government of India should not give right to an accused to pray for grant of default bail even though charge sheet has not been filed within the time prescribed… is clearly erroneous and not in accordance with law,” the SC ruled.

The court was hearing an appeal by one S Kasi against the High Court order on the May 11.

Arrested in a case of theft and trespass on February 21, he had moved for default bail after remaining in jail for 73 days.

The High Court rejected his plea, saying the Supreme Court by way of a March 23 order extended the period of limitation in various matters in view of the Covid situation and hence he will not be entitled to default bail.

Ananthakrishnan G

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram