The Supreme Court on Friday chided lower courts for their tendency to ignore the principle that “bail is rule and jail is exception” and to “play safe” by denying bail to accused, saying this violated the fundamental right to life and liberty.

The court made these remarks while granting bail to former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in corruption (CBI) and money-laundering (ED) cases, refusing to have him run any more from one court to another in a game of “snake(s) and ladder(s)”.

“...It appears that the trial courts and the high courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception is, at times, followed in (the) breach,” the bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan said.

“On account of non-grant of bail even in straightforward, open and shut cases, this court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial courts and the high courts should recognise the principle that ‘bail is rule and jail is exception’.”

It added: “...Keeping the appellant behind bars for an unlimited period of time in the hope of speedy completion of trial would deprive his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. As observed time and again, prolonged incarceration before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not be permitted to become punishment without trial.”

The apex court granted bail to the AAP leader, whose over 17-month imprisonment had sparked allegations of a political vendetta, highlighting the delay in beginning the trial – related to alleged kickbacks involving the Delhi government’s now-scrapped excise policy.

Friday’s judgment is expected to make it easier for chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, also in jail in the same matter, to secure similar relief.

The apex court rejected the additional solicitor-general’s argument and the findings of the trial court and Delhi High Court that the trial got delayed because of Sisodia and his co-accused filing multiple applications before the trial court.

“…He (Sisodia) has filed only 13 applications in the CBI matter and 14 in the ED matter.... Some of the applications are for seeking permission to meet his wife or permission to file vakalatnama, to put signature on the documents, seeking permission to sign a cheque, etc,” the judgment, authored by Justice Gavai, said.

“...When we specifically asked the learned ASG to point out any order wherein the learned trial judge found any of the applications of the appellant to be frivolous, not a single order could be pointed out”.

Right to speedy trial

“As observed by this court, the right to speedy trial and the right to liberty are sacrosanct rights. On denial of these rights, the trial court as well as the high court ought to have given due weightage to this factor,” the bench said.

It referred to the Supreme Court’s recent judgment while granting bail in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra and Another.

It said: “If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime.”

The top court also cited another apex court judgment, in the Gudikanti Narasimhulu case, that said the requirement of bail was merely to secure the attendance of the accused at trial, and that the trial courts and the high courts seemed to have forgotten the well-settled principle that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment.

‘Pillar to post’

The bench rejected the prosecution’s demand to direct Sisodia to approach the trial court again for bail.

“Now, relegating the appellant to again approach the trial court and thereafter the high court and only thereafter this court, in our view, would be making him play a game of ‘snake(s) and ladder(s)’,” the judgment said.

“The trial court and the high court have already taken a view and in our view relegating the appellant again to the trial court and the high court would be an empty formality,” it added.

“In a matter pertaining to the life and liberty of a citizen which is one of the most sacrosanct rights guaranteed by the Constitution, a citizen cannot be made to run from pillar to post. The memorable adage, that procedure is a handmaiden and not a mistress of justice rings loudly in our ears.”

The apex court had last October dismissed Sisodia’s first bail plea with liberty to approach it if the trial did not start within six to eight months. On June 4 this year, hearing his second bail plea, the court had asked him to wait till July 3 following a government assurance.

On Friday, it said: “…In the ED matter as well as the CBI matter, 493 witnesses have been named. The case involves thousands of pages of documents and over a lakh pages of digitised documents. It is thus clear that there is not even the remotest possibility of the trial being concluded in the near future.”

It said Sisodia was to be released from Tihar jail against a bail bond for ₹10 lakh with two sureties of an equal amount. He has to surrender his passport to the trial court, report to the investigating officer every Monday and Thursday morning, and refrain from any attempt to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.

Sisodia had resigned from the Delhi government shortly after the CBI arrested him on February 26 last year. The ED arrested him on March 9, 2023.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Sisodia in court.

Hero’s welcome

Sisodia received a hero’s welcome in pouring rain outside Tihar jail in the evening.

Wearing a half-sleeved red shirt, he walked out flanked by AAP parliamentary party chairman Sanjay Singh and Delhi minister Atishi — who had cried in joy at a public event when told about the bail order.

“How will we repay the debt to Babasaheb (B.R. Ambedkar) who had planned back then that if a dictator puts anyone in jail, the Constitution will save them?” Sisodia told the crowd.

A source claimed Sisodia was unlikely to rejoin the government and would work to rebuild the party’s scam-tainted image before the upcoming polls in Haryana and Delhi.

Singh told reporters: “Manish Sisodia’s bail is a tight slap on Modi government’s dictatorship…. For 17 months, you kept a person in jail against whom there was not a single proof; not a single rupee was recovered, no property papers were found.”

Leaders of several Opposition parties including the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, Samajwadi Party, CPI and the DMK welcomed Sisodia’s release.

Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren tweeted: “This is a victory of democracy and a defeat of injustice and dictatorship.”

BJP parliamentarian Bansuri Swaraj said: “He got bail on the basis of a delay in trial…. He is still an accused and will be held accountable in the court of law for betraying the people of Delhi.”