ANIL KUMAR SINGH Vs. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Chief Standing Counsel. The learned Chief Standing Counsel prayed that he may be allowed one week's time to find out whether any Judge has been appointed to the Special Court, Varanasi, (Constituted under the U. P. Gangsters and Anti-Social (Activities) Prevention Act). The request of the learned Chief Standing Counsel cannot be accepted for the reason that I had called for a report from the Registrar day before yesterday whether any such appointment has been made or not. The Registrar has reported that under the orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dated 15-9-1992 the name Sri M. P. Pandey, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Varanasi was recommended to the Government of U.P. for appointment as Special Judge for the disposal of the cases under the Act. No notification has been issued by the Government and a reminder was also sent but till date no notification has been received.

(2.) The petitioner was arrested in the month of July, 1992. It is stated in the writ petition that the bail application of the petitioner was moved but the same has not been entertained by the Sessions Judge, Varanasi and that the learned Sessions Judge is not disposing of the bail applications of the Special Court, which is lying vacant. It is painful to note that the State Government has not appointed a Judge to the Special Court constituted under the Act and the same is lying vacant since July 1992 and innumerable accused are languishing in jail awaiting the decision of their bail applications. It appears that our civilised society is slipping back to the times when there was no Rule of law and there was no guarantee of decent human life. The right to personal liberty the right to equality etc. were won after a long and arduous struggle in 19th Century by the people of England and other European countries. In our own country the Rule of Law is not a new concept, the Dharmshastras had established a kind of Rule of Law where even the king had to act in accordance with the prescribed rules and not arbitarily . Unfortunately most of the rulers in the centuries that followed, lost the track of the footprints of their righteous predecessors and chose to follow a path of personal pleasures and advantages to themselves and to their coterie. With the advent of the foreign rulers and codification of laws the non formal sources were imparted definiteness and certainty and their moorings were tied down to an as certained shore. Today we have been again able to give to ourselves the Constitution which enshrines the fundamental rights. These valuable acquisitions were achieved after a long drawn struggle for independence which involved untold sacrifice by innumerable people who though invisible and forgotten paved the foundation of the Constitutional guarantees, to the people. We cannot afford to lose these hard earned rights by allowing them to be thrown to the winds by the State either by its deliberate actions or by omissions.

(3.) If bail applications are not heard and disposed of expeditiously and are allowed to linger on for months, as in this case, it would give opportunity to unscrupulous administrators and police officers to put innocent persons behind the bars and the very concept of personal liberty would become illusory. Dharmshastra emphasised that it is the duty of the king (now the State) to protect his people even from his own officers. This protection extended to punish persons who invade man's rights, which was characterised as internal aggression. The guarantee of personal liberty as enshrined in Art. 21 of the Constitution includes the right to a speedy trial. Needless to emphasise that the right to speedy trial has within its sweep the right to speedy disposal of bail applications.