IN RE Vs. GUDDU MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. Rituparna De Ghose, learned advocate appearing for the appellants. She submits though the appeal had been heard earlier, due to prevailing pandemic conditions hearing was postponed. Appellants have already suffered detention for about 20 years. She accordingly, prays for suspension of sentence of the appellants.

(2.) On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is ample evidence on record implicating the appellants.

(3.) We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties. Irrespective of the merits in the appeal, we are of the view inordinate incarceration of the appellants for about 20 years by itself is an infraction of their fundamental right to speedy justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In similar cases[1] the Apex Court had directed suspension of sentence and release on bail of the convicts pending their appeals before the High Court. Appellants are entitled to similar treatment in the present case. Thus, on the ground of protracted detention suffered by the appellants infracting their fundamental right to speedy justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, we are inclined to suspend the sentence imposed upon the appellants and enlarge them on bail. [1] Saudan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 308 of 2022. Order dtd. 25/2/2022. Rajendra Singh & Ors. Vs. Sate of U.R, Writ Petition(s) (Criminal) No(s). 52/2022