2020 Delhi Riots: Justice Kaul asked, “Should High Courts even be spending so many hours on bail matters?”
The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard the Delhi Police’s petitions against the bail granted to three student activists in a case involving the 2020 Delhi riots, which resulted in 53 deaths and over 700 injuries, and opposed to holding people behind bars unnecessarily, also expressed concerns over long hearings on bail applications.
“We don’t believe in unnecessarily keeping people behind the bars. Bail matters should not go on and on and should not be dealt with in this manner,” said Justice S K Kaul.
Justice Kaul was hearing petitions filed by the Delhi police challenging the High Court order granting bail to the three accused namely, Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, and Asif Iqbal Tanha. They are facing charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the 2020 North East Delhi riots.
Read More- PM Modi’s Advice to BJP : Engage with Muslims even if they don’t vote for us
The bench, which also included Justices A.S. Oka and J.B. Pardiwala, stated, spending hours on bail petitions hearing in the case was a waste of time for the Delhi High Court.
“Should High Courts even be spending so many hours on bail matters? I don’t understand this. It’s a complete waste of the High Court’s judicial time. Both sides want a full trial to go on in a bail matter. I don’t understand,” remarked Justice Kaul.
The bench made an oral statement throughout the hearing that it does not support keeping people in jail unnecessarily and that bail issues shouldn’t be handled in this way. The bench noted that while discussing the merits of the case in bail applications, the hearing becomes drawn out.
In a case involving a bigger conspiracy in the Delhi riots, the High Court’s decision of granting bail to activists Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha on June 15, 2021, was being challenged by the Delhi Police in the Top Court.
One of the accused was represented by a lawyer who claimed that the police had made a merits argument before the high court. Nair contested it, claiming that the police had simply responded to the High Court’s inquiry regarding whether or not the accused’s actions constituted an act of terrorism.
Justice Kaul orally observed: “You have spent hours in bail matters. It is a complete waste of time for the high court. You want a full trial in bail matters?”
The Top Court set a new hearing date for the case for January 31. It had previously stated in July 2021 that it was reluctant to consider revoking the three activists’ Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act bail (UAPA). The top court had stated that long arguments about the anti-terror law’s provisions were being held in bail petitions. It had been made clear that the High Court rulings would not be considered as precedents and that no party may rely on them in any way.
