In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India expressed surprise at the Patna High Court’s directive to conclude a criminal trial within one year, highlighting the significant backlog faced by courts in Bihar. The apex court’s observations came in the case of Santosh Kumar @ Santosh v. The State of Bihar (SLP (Crl.) No. 6648/2024), where it granted bail to the appellant while criticizing the High Court’s approach.
The case was heard by a division bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih. The appellant, Santosh Kumar, was represented by advocates Raja Choudhary, Gaurav Ujjawal Verma, Jatin Bhardwaj, Gaurav Khosala, and Babu Malayi, with Rajesh Singh Chauhan as the Advocate on Record. The respondent State of Bihar was represented by Nitya Sharma, with Azmat Hayat Amanullah as the Advocate on Record.
Background of the Case
Santosh Kumar had been in custody since June 24, 2023, facing charges triable by a Judicial Magistrate’s court. The case was still at the stage of the accused’s appearance, with a charge sheet already filed. The appellant had previously been granted bail in three other cases mentioned in the counter-affidavit filed by the State.
Key Legal Issues and Court’s Decision
The primary issue before the Supreme Court was the appropriateness of the Patna High Court’s order, which not only rejected the bail application on February 28, 2024, but also directed that the trial be concluded within one year.
The Supreme Court expressed astonishment at this directive, stating:
“We are surprised to note that notwithstanding the decision of Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (2024) INSC 150, the High Courts are issuing such directions without even considering that every criminal Court in the State of Bihar will have huge pendency.”
This observation underscores the court’s concern about unrealistic timelines being set without considering the existing backlog in Bihar’s criminal courts.
The apex court also noted a discrepancy in the custody period. While the state counsel claimed the appellant was arrested in August 2023, the High Court’s records showed he had been in custody since June 24, 2023.
Also Read
Court’s Decision and Observations
Considering the circumstances, the Supreme Court decided to grant bail to the appellant. The court ordered:
“The appellant shall be produced before the Trial Court within a maximum period of one week from today. The Trial Court shall enlarge the appellant on bail on appropriate terms and conditions, pending trial.”
