NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Friday had a first-hand experience of the misuse of its ruling that an accused is entitled to bail if he as undertrial has served half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence he is accused of.
One Mohd Tapseer, executive council member of Karnataka unit of proscribed organisation People's Front of India (PFI), was arrested in 2022. Senior advocate Gagan Gupta, on his behalf, claimed that the minimum punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against him was five years and given the mandate of the SC's judgment, his client was entitled to bail.
Gupta said Tapseer was entitled to bail as there is no material evidence produced against him by the prosecution in the chargesheet and that since there are over 700 witnesses to be examined, the trial would be prolonged. The state counsel told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that though the trial court is taking up the matter almost every week for hearing, the charges have not yet been framed because of the delaying tactics adopted by many of the accused, all of whom are represented by a single advocate. He said the accused file multiple bail petitions and the trial court remains engaged in deciding them. Because of this, the trial court has not been able to devote time to continue with the trial proceedings and frame charges.
The bench asked the trial court to expeditiously proceed to the stage of framing charges against the accused and empowered it to send a communication to the court for cancellation of already bail granted to those accused if they were found adopting delaying tactics.
One Mohd Tapseer, executive council member of Karnataka unit of proscribed organisation People's Front of India (PFI), was arrested in 2022. Senior advocate Gagan Gupta, on his behalf, claimed that the minimum punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against him was five years and given the mandate of the SC's judgment, his client was entitled to bail.
Gupta said Tapseer was entitled to bail as there is no material evidence produced against him by the prosecution in the chargesheet and that since there are over 700 witnesses to be examined, the trial would be prolonged. The state counsel told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that though the trial court is taking up the matter almost every week for hearing, the charges have not yet been framed because of the delaying tactics adopted by many of the accused, all of whom are represented by a single advocate. He said the accused file multiple bail petitions and the trial court remains engaged in deciding them. Because of this, the trial court has not been able to devote time to continue with the trial proceedings and frame charges.
The bench asked the trial court to expeditiously proceed to the stage of framing charges against the accused and empowered it to send a communication to the court for cancellation of already bail granted to those accused if they were found adopting delaying tactics.
You may also like

Why is Anthony Edwards not playing tonight vs the Charlotte Hornets? Latest update on the Minnesota Timberwolves star guard's injury report (November 1, 2025)

"See Bihar then and now": Pawan Singh counters Khesari Lal's remarks, says there's clear difference in state's development

TTP emerges as dominant outfit in Pakistan's militant landscape

Jyotiraditya Scindia lays foundation stone for Integrated Sohra Tourism Circuit under PM-DevINE

Zubeen Garg's Last Film 'Roi Roi Binale' Opens To Packed Theatres Across Assam; Bollywood Movies Get No Screens




