Long pre-trial detention can justify bail despite UAPA restrictions when speedy trial rights are being infringed.

Long pre-trial incarceration can justify bail even in serious IPC and UAPA matters where the trial has made little progress and is unlikely to finish soon. The Supreme Court held that the statutory restrictions on bail under the UAPA do not wholly exclude constitutional courts' power to grant bail when continued detention infringes Article 21 rights to speedy trial and personal liberty. Because the accused had spent more than nine years in custody while only a small part of the evidence had been recorded, bail was granted and the High Court's refusal was set aside, subject to conditions on travel, attendance, passport custody, and non-interference with evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted where the accused has remained in custody for a long period, the trial is unlikely to conclude soon, and the allegations arise under the IPC and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

Analysis: The appellant had remained in custody for more than nine years, while only a small part of the prosecution evidence had been recorded. The continued pace of the trial indicated that conclusion within a reasonable time was unlikely. The statutory restrictions on bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 do not completely exclude the power of constitutional courts to grant bail when continued detention would infringe the right to speedy trial and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Seriousness of the accusations and the invocation of the UAPA cannot, by themselves, justify indefinite pre-trial incarceration where the trial has not progressed meaningfully. The Court also found it appropriate to secure the accused by imposing conditions relating to travel, attendance, passport custody, and non-interference with evidence.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the appellant, and the rejection of bail by the High Court was set aside.

Final Conclusion: Long incarceration without a realistic prospect of timely trial justified release on bail notwithstanding the seriousness of the offences and the statutory bail restrictions.

Ratio Decidendi: Statutory restrictions on bail must yield where continued pre-trial detention has become excessive and the constitutional right to speedy trial and personal liberty is being violated.

---