The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a 25-year-old murder accused who spent more than five years in custody awaiting trial, ruling that prolonged imprisonment of young undertrials exposes them to prison abuse and undermines their potential for rehabilitation.
In an order delivered on August 31, Justice Milind J Jadhav held that the judiciary must explore every constructive opportunity to reform and reintegrate young offenders into society, enabling them to earn an honourable livelihood rather than leaving them exposed to prison life.
Delay in Trial and Constitutional Rights
The applicant, Shubham Balasaheb Takale, was arrested in connection with a 2018 case and faced charges under the Indian Penal Code for murder, rioting while armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, criminal intimidation, and voluntarily causing hurt. Seeking bail, Takale cited his youth, the extended delay in judicial proceedings, and his fundamental right to personal liberty and a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Evaluating the plea, the court noted that Takale had remained detained as an undertrial for five years and three months. Although the trial had formally commenced, the prosecution had examined only three out of approximately 35 listed witnesses, making the conclusion of the case unlikely in the foreseeable future.
Justice Jadhav reiterated the established legal tenet that bail is the rule and jail is the exception. The court emphasised that pre-trial detention must not turn punitive, as an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and ruled that such an extended period of custody without conviction raised serious constitutional concerns regarding the right to a speedy trial.
Focus on Rehabilitation of Young Offenders
Addressing the institutional impact of detention, the court observed that incarceration inflicts disproportionate harm on youthful individuals. Justice Jadhav pointed to statistical evidence showing that young inmates frequently face abuse inside correctional facilities, warning that continued detention could lead the applicant to lose faith in societal institutions, waste his life, or be pushed further down a criminal path.
The ruling stated that courts should take a reformative approach and accept constructive risks when dealing with young undertrials before subjecting them to further confinement. Granting bail, the court expressed hope that the applicant’s family would actively assist in guiding him toward a productive life and supporting his reintegration as a responsible citizen.
