AKHTARIBI versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2001] 2 S.C.R. 626 · Decided: 22-03-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS, R.P. SETHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

I 
A 
AKHTARIBI 
-+--
v. 
STATE OF M.P. 
MARCH 22, 200 I 
B 
[K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 21. 
Speedy Trial-Right to-Bail-Grant of-Guidelines-Accused sentenced 
c 
to life imprisonment-Appeal unlikely to be heard in the near future-Bail 
application rejected by High Court-Held : Prolonged delay in trial and 
appeals confers a right on the accused to apply for bail-Convicts may be 
released on bail if appeals not disposed of within 5 years-High Courts directed 
to constitute regular and special Benches for disposal of appeals-On facts, 
-t...: 
accused released on bail by keeping sentence in suspension. 
D 
The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of 
her daughter-in-law. The appeal filed by the appellant was pending before 
the High Court and not listed for bearing till date. The appellant's bail 
application was rejected by the High Court. Hence this appeal. 
E 
On behalf of the appellant it was contended that the appeal was 
.I""" 
unlikely to be heard in the near future in the normal course. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : To have speedy justice is a fundamental right, which Dows 
F 
from Article 21 of the Constitution. Prolonged delay in disposal of the 
trials and thereafter appeals in criminal cases, for no fault of the accused, 
confers a right upon him to apply for bail. Appeal being a statutory right, 
the trial court's verdict does not attain finality during pendency of the 
appeal and for that purpose his trial is deemed to be continuing despite 
G 
conviction. Due to huge vacancies in the High .Court the accused in crimi· 
nal cases are languishing in the jails for no fault of theirs. In the absence of 
prompt action under the Constitution to fill up the vacancies, it is incum-
• 
bent upon the High Courts to find ways and means by taking steps to 
_,..(....; 
ensure the disposal of criminal appeals, particularly such appeals where 
the accused are in jails, that the matters are disposed of within a specified 
H 
period not exceeding 5 years in any case. Regular Benches to deal with the 
626 
AKHTAR! BI v. STATE [SETHI, J.] 
627 
-t 
criminal cases can be set up where such appeals are listed for final dis-
A 
posal. Ir an appeal is not disposed of within the aforesaid period of 5 years, 
for no fault of the convicts, such convicts may be released on bail on such 
conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the Court. In computing 
the period of 5 years, the delay for any period, which is requisite in 
preparation or the record and the delay attributable to the convict or his 
B 
counsel can be deducted. There may be cases where even after the lapse or 
5 years the convicts may, under the special circumstances or the case, be 
held not entitled to bail pending the disposal or the appeals filed by them. It 
is, therefore, appropriate to direct the appellant's release on bail by keep· 
ing the sentence awarded to her in suspension. (628-E-H; 629-A-C] 
c 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 320 
of 2001. 
~ 
>-
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.7.2000 of the Madhya Pradesh 
High Court in Cd.A. No. 708 of 1997. 
D 
K.K. Mohan and Ms. loon Choudhary for the Appellant. 
Ms.· Vibha Dutta Makhija and Uma Nath Singh for the Respondent . 
... -;... 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
E 
SETHI, J. Leave granted. 
For the murder of her daughter-in-law, Prem Bai, the appellant was 
tried with others and after the conclusion of the trial, sentenced to impris-
onment for life vide judgment of the court dated 27th February, 1997. The 
F 
appeal filed by her is pending in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and not 
listed for hearing till date. Her prayer for grant of bail, pending disposal of 
the appeal, on the grounds of infirmity and old age has been rejected by the 
High Court vide the order impugned in this appeal. 
At the time of preliminary hearing on 1.12.2000, the learned Senior 
G 
Coonse! Shri Anoop G. Chaudhary submitted that the position in the 
·-...... "· 
Madhya Pradesh High Court regarding criminal appeals pending before the 
Division Bench was that as on that day appeals of 1989-1990 have only been 
taken up. The appeal filed by the appellant, being an appeal of 1997, there 
was no reasonable chance for its being brought on Board. Distressed by such 
H 
628 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
a situation allegedly prevailing in the High Court, we called for the report 
1-
of the Registrar of th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.