18 May,2026 02:28 PM IST | New Delhi | ANI
Supreme Court remarks that bail is the rule, jail is the exception, even in UAPA cases. Representational Pic
Supreme Court expresses reservations regarding some aspects of its earlier judgement delivered in January by another bench denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, accused in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.
Supreme Court takes a critical note that its two-judge bench of the top court had deviated from the views taken by the verdict of a three-judge bench.
A bench headed by Justice BV Nagarathna says that another bench did not properly follow the judgment delivered by a three-judge bench, which recognised long delay in trial as a ground for bail in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The observation of the Supreme Court comes while granting bail to a man accused of his alleged involvement in a cross-border syndicate engaged in drug trafficking and financing terror in Jammu and Kashmir.
Supreme Court remarks that bail is the rule, jail is the exception, even in UAPA cases. It says that the right to a speedy trial cannot be defeated merely because an accused has been booked under this stringent anti-terror law.
This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever
