In a significant move highlighting the paramount importance of personal liberty, the Supreme Court has called upon the judges of the Bombay High Court to promptly hear and dispose of bail matters. The directive, issued by a bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, underscores the critical need for timely adjudication to prevent the deprivation of individuals' fundamental rights.

Expressing dismay over delays and perceived excuses in handling bail applications, the apex court lamented instances where cases were not decided expeditiously. It noted a concerning trend wherein matters were either postponed or remitted on various grounds instead of being adjudicated on their merits.

The Supreme Court's observations arose during the hearing of a bail plea on February 16, following its previous directive to the High Court on January 29 to expedite the case. Prior to this order, the High Court had been reluctant to address the matter substantively, opting instead for what the Supreme Court described as flimsy grounds.

Central to the Supreme Court's concern is the protection of personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The apex court underscored that the failure to expedite matters related to individual liberty not only undermines the sanctity of this fundamental right but also deprives citizens of their constitutional entitlements.

Acknowledging Article 21 as the soul of the Constitution, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for timely disposition of bail matters to safeguard citizens' liberties. It cautioned against any actions that could potentially infringe upon the rights guaranteed under this provision.

Consequently, the Supreme Court directed Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya of the Bombay High Court to impress upon all judges the urgency of hearing and deciding bail cases promptly. The apex court also instructed that a copy of its order be furnished to facilitate necessary action by the Chief Justice.

In its directive, the Supreme Court urged the High Court to prioritize the expeditious resolution of bail and anticipatory bail applications. Recognizing the significance of timely justice delivery, it underscored the duty of the judiciary to uphold constitutional values and protect individual liberties.

Case: Amol Vitthal Vahile vs State of Maharashtra,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 545/2024.

Click to read/download order.