Reinforcing a crucial balance

The Supreme Court has struck a blow (again) for the preservation of personal liberty as a cornerstone of India’s legal system, even under the weight of stringent provisions of bail under special statutes. On Wednesday, it reiterated the principle of bail being the rule and jail the exception in cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), where bail is based on the principle of reverse onus — the accused must prove they haven’t committed the crime, instead of the prosecution having to prove they have.

This ruling is part of a broader judicial trend where the top court has been steadily dismantling the barriers to bail in cases under harsh laws such as the PMLA and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). Through recent judgments, the Supreme Court has consistently emphasised the primacy of individual liberty, asserting that courts must ensure liberty, not incarceration, is the default position. In Wednesday’s ruling granting bail to Jharkhand chief minister, Hemant Soren’s aide, the apex court clarified that Section 45 of the PMLA, which requires the accused to prove their innocence for securing bail, does not override the fundamental principle rooted in Article 21 of the Constitution — that personal liberty is the rule, and its deprivation, the exception. This ruling follows other recent ones where the Court has stressed the importance of fairness and the protection of individual rights. In the Delhi excise policy case, it highlighted the need for the courts to recognise the right to speedy trial and that bail is the norm. On Tuesday, it granted bail to Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K Kavitha, overruling the Delhi high court’s reasoning that PMLA’s rigorous bail standards should be diluted only for “vulnerable” women, criticising this logic as “perverse” and setting a dangerous precedent. The top court’s August 13 ruling while granting bail to a UAPA accused, a significant stance in the context of anti-terror laws where the presumption often tilts against granting bail, further underscored this trend.

Through these judgments, the Supreme Court has gradually eased the stringent conditions for bail in PMLA and other severe statutes, promoting an interpretation of the law that doesn’t run afoul of the constitutional protection of individual liberty. This shift is crucial in ensuring that the scales of justice remain balanced while upholding the rule of law.

Unlock a world of Benefits with HT! From insightful newsletters to real-time news alerts and a personalized news feed – it’s all here, just a click away! –Login Now!