Former CJI DY Chandrachud Speaks On Umar Khalid Bail Delays | 5 Years Without Trial #cjichandrachud

Added: 2026-05-28

[00:00:00]has to be the rule. I now speak as a citizen and not as a judge.

[00:00:04]>> Absolutely.

[00:00:05]Bail before conviction should be a matter of right.

[00:00:10]Because our law is founded our law is founded on one presumption and that's the presumption of innocence. That is every accused is presumed to be innocent until they are proved guilty at a trial.

[00:00:25]The second pre-trial bail cannot be a form of punishment.

[00:00:31]Because if someone is in jail for say 5 years or 7 years is an undertrial and then is finally acquitted, how do you compensate for the lost time? When do you deny bail to an accused? Suppose you have a serial rapist and a murderer who has been arrested on the allegation that that person has committed say six or seven rapes and murders.

[00:00:51]There's a danger that if you let that person out into society that person might repeat the offense. So, this is a classic case where you would deny a bail. A second exception where a person on being released on bail wouldn't be available to face trial that is leave the Indian jurisdiction and escape out.

[00:01:07]That's a valid reason to deny bail. The third, a person who would tamper with evidence at the trial. If these three exceptions are not made out, bail has to be the rule. Now, the problem which we are facing today is this.

[00:01:22]A lot of our laws, particularly those relating to national security, have turned the law on its head by substituting the presumption of innocence with almost a presumption of guilt. Now, what does a court do when the state says national security is involved? And there I believe that the court is duty-bound to carefully scrutinize as to whether national security is involved and second, whether the detention of the accused is proportional to the plea for national security.

[00:01:55]Otherwise, what's happening is this is that you find people being incarcerated for numbers of years. One of the serious problems of the criminal justice administration in India is the inability of our prosecutions to conclude trials within a reasonable period of time, which means that the prosecution is not going to be completed within say 1 year or 6 months or 3 years. If that is so, right to life under Article 21 includes the right to a speedy trial. And even if an individual law denies the right to bail as many of our laws do today, so then our Narcotic Substances does that. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Laws enacted by Parliament are tributaries which follow from that source, and therefore ordinary laws must yield to the Constitution. And therefore, I'm very clear in my mind that unless the well-settled exceptions are made out in a particular case, the accused is entitled to bail.