Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 4 months ago
In an exclusive interview with India Today TV, former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud spoke on the ‘bail, not jail' principle, Justice Yashwant Varma cash row and other issues. 

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00article 21 which guarantees the right to protection of life and liberty of all persons
00:09and article 32 which allows citizens to approach the court if their fundamental rights are being
00:15violated the question then arises this is there in the letter of the constitution but is the
00:22spirit being embraced because i specifically refer to laws that have been brought in by government
00:28by parliament uapa pmla that make it very very difficult for a citizen uh to be able to enforce
00:38his rights enshrined under article 21 of the constitution right to life and liberty the
00:43the very nature of the law means that most courts deny bail at the very first instance and you spend
00:49years in jail if you're arrested under uapa or pmla so the difference between the letter of the law
00:55and the spirit of it and therefore the heart and soul of the constitution is somewhere being eroded
01:01you know one of the fundamental aspects of our law has been the presumption of innocence
01:06that unless a person is proven to be guilty that person is presumed to be innocent which means
01:14as justice krishnaya said bail must be the rule jail must be the exception now our laws including you
01:22some of the recent laws uh have imposed very stringent uh you know requirements before bail can be granted
01:29what can the judges do in a situation like that the task of a judge is not an easy task but one thing
01:36which judges can do and which the supreme court has done it began with a judgment by justice surya kant
01:43uh a year or two years two years ago uh which is really a very significant judgment
01:48is this that if the trial is unlikely to conclude at a reasonably foreseeable future
01:56uh then the right to a fair trial which means an expeditious trial cannot be denied in other words
02:05if the trial is not going to conclude earlier then irrespective of the stringent requirements of that
02:11particular law bail must be granted to that individual suppose there are hundred witnesses which are cited
02:18by an investigative agency now those hundred witnesses are not going to be examined until
02:22say five years or six years or seven years uh end what if that person is eventually acquitted that
02:28means that person would have spent five years in jail though that person was eventually held to be
02:33innocent so one way of enforcing the right to life under article 21 which you've rightly highlighted
02:40is to ensure that this is born in mind by the courts namely yeah go ahead namely namely that unless the
02:49investigative agency can be put to a temporal limit that you're going to conclude the trial uh within
02:56say a year or you're going to conclude the trial within a foreseeable period bail should be granted
03:03you know i i don't know whether you know where i'm taking you to but one of the contentious issues
03:09based on exactly what you said just now is the umar khalid case which has attracted so much of media
03:15attention he spent five years in jail he and other activists arrested under uapa for their alleged role
03:21in a conspiracy of the delhi riots of 2020 trial hasn't begun the court says there are hundreds of
03:27witnesses who still have to be produced before the court he's continuing incarceration isn't it against
03:33the spirit of article 21 uh rajdeep i've made my point clear on the issue of principle yes and i believe
03:41that the principle which i have spoken about now as a citizen not as a judge must be applied across the
03:48board on this particular case the supreme court has seized off the issue next week and merely because
03:54i have ceased to be a judge i shouldn't become a citizen journalist and tell the supreme court what
03:59they should be doing next week but you're stating a principle you're emphasizing the principle that if
04:06the investigating authorities cannot conclude a trial within and a within a certain finite period
04:15then bail must be the rule and jail the exception are we clear on that absolutely and subject to
04:21exceptions which i said uh which are well settled these are not exceptions which i have devised right
04:26now in the course of the interview these are exceptions which have been developed over the last 75
04:30years in in the course of our jurisprudence because there is an element of selectivity
04:36also in this entire practice of bail not jail let me give you an example when you were a judge you gave
04:42for example a former colleague of mine ordnob goswamy you you you were heading a vacation bench at the time
04:48you speedily granted him bail rightly so we believe because he was the manner in which he had been
04:54confined i believe was he had been wrongfully confined and therefore you gave him bail speedily
04:58then you have a siddik kapan another journalist lesser known spends more than two years in jail and
05:04is not granted bail and i can give you a number of cases where individuals who perhaps do not have the same
05:09access or or are not vvips do not get get bail instantly so the entire law of bail seems to be
05:18dependent on selectivity and who the judge is i hear from senior lawyers if i go before a particular
05:24judge i know i won't get bail and there's been this talk that that's one of the reasons why uh
05:29adjournments are sought or you withdraw a particular case from a particular judge does that again trouble
05:34you the admin we are coming to the administration of justice whether bail is also very selective
05:39you know rajdeep let me make it very clear so far as i'm concerned and i've said this before
05:44i granted bail to uh mr arnab goswamy yes but i also granted bail to zubair yes so therefore i said well
05:52i have granted bail from a to z and that was my own personal philosophy that you must grant bail particularly
06:00in a certain category of offenses now i'll you've highlighted but you was missing umar khalid you
06:05he didn't appear before you but he may have but gone before another judge i'll deal with that i'm
06:09exactly what you're the point which you're making i don't want to duck that issue yes i want to respond
06:14to that one of the issues which a lot of people have spoken about say our courts today is that we are
06:23polycentric courts or poly vocal courts not really polycentric that's uh lon lon fuller's phrase we are
06:31poly vocal courts now what is meant by a poly vocal court with the kind of volume of litigation which we
06:39have say 80 000 cases uh 70 000 cases being filed every year in the supreme court no supreme court in
06:46the world perhaps except for the brazilian supreme court deals with deals with this kind of inflow of
06:52cases now as a result what happens is this you have 34 judges in the supreme court obviously all 34 can't
07:00sit down together and you know deal with one case because then you wouldn't be dealing with cases
07:05uh so we sit in batches of two we sit occasionally in batches of three but usually in batches of two
07:12judges so you have 17 benches now with 17 benches deciding cases you're bound to have a poly vocal court
07:20where you know personal predispositions of judges in a very abstract sense rajdeep it shouldn't make a
07:27difference as to which bench you go before but you have to accept that well uh different judges have
07:35different predispositions the way they think about our social life the way they think about the law uh you
07:42know when i was a lawyer you would have judges who would be a little more uh you know favorable to labor
07:48other judges felt that you know our law had gone to the extreme in protecting the rights of labor and
07:53not protecting the rights of industry uh so you know you have different philosophies among judges
07:59should these be there should they not be there the fact of the matter is you cannot avoid it
08:07and just a reminder that you can catch that entire interview uh with justice chandral
08:11where he speaks on a variety of subjects including the cash for door case that has caused such a stir
08:18as well as sedition free speech and plenty more collegium system on our india today
08:23youtube channel so look out for that on the india today youtube channel
Comments

Recommended