- Of late, the country is witnessing rising cases of people placed behind bars on frivolous charges largely based on imaginary issues like love jihad, hurting religious sentiments, sedition, terming critiques as anti-nationals, circumventing freedom of speech/expressions as guaranteed by the Constitution, and similar other issues. As can be easily inferred, these supposed infringements neither deserve any encouragement nor hold judicial scrutiny to pass the intended muster. No wonder, the society stands vertically divided and polarized based on the support extended or vehemently opposed to such moves by the authorities concerned vitiating the atmosphere.
PC: Dr Arun Mitra/IPA
- Most worryingly, the law enforcement agencies are booking cases against those innocuous statements as also humorous uptakes satirically critiquing the ongoing issues plaguing the nation in one or the other form. A case in point is the arrest of a comedian from Madhya Pradesh whose three bail applications were rejected by a magistrate, sessions court, and high court, respectively. This issue is in the news headlines over the last few weeks receiving widespread coverage from different quarters. Finally, the incarcerated comedian was left with no option but to approach the Supreme Court seeking last recourse which took less than a minute to grant bail.
- The Supreme Court has unambiguously sent a message to the enforcement agencies as well as subordinate courts whilst upholding the tenet of judicial propriety of bail, not jail acting as the primary guiding principle on trivial matters witnessed in day-to-day functioning. Note that the Apex Court granted relief without even scrutinizing the violation of the fundamental right to free speech by ascertaining whether the arrest was necessary in the first place. Such a mature and welcome approach, befitting the stature of the SC, should act as a precedent for lower courts whilst adjudicating on similar cases which are dime a dozen.
PC: Ananya Bhatnagar
- Delving further deep into the history of the instant case, the Madhya Pradesh HC’s Indore bench had preferred to dissect IPC Section 295A against the comedian that criminalized malicious and deliberate acts intended to hurt religious belief under the garb of standup comedy. Needless to mention, such judicial criminalizing of humour tantamount to a worrisome trend growing disproportionately. The SC in its earlier pronouncement had warned police officers against unnecessary arrests and magistrates against authorizing such detentions in non-bailable and cognizable offences prescribing less than seven years imprisonment.
- A five-point checklist was provided by the SC before certifying arrests viz. possibility of committing another offence, proper investigation of the present offence, preventing evidence from disappearing, a threat to witnesses, and the possibility of accused absconding. Disturbingly, these eminently sensible checklists are neglected with impunity. The resultant outcome is a whopping two-thirds of the jail population comprises under-trial prisoners which is self-explanatory of the deplorable state afflicting us. Thus, due diligence to uphold bail, not jail maxim should be the mantra to grant relief rather than piling on the misery despite judicial remedies available
