Supreme Court says right to speedy trial applies regardless of nature of offence

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reaffirmed that the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the seriousness or nature of the offence.

The observation was made while granting bail to Arvind Dham, a former promoter of Amtek Auto Ltd, who is accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe said prolonged pretrial detention, where a trial does not begin or fails to make reasonable progress, effectively turns detention into punishment. The court observed that if the state or a prosecuting agency is unable to ensure the completion of a trial within a reasonable time, bail should not be opposed solely on the ground that the alleged offence is serious.

Allowing Dham’s appeal against the denial of bail, the bench relied on earlier rulings, including Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v State of Maharashtra (2024) and Manish Sisodia v Enforcement Directorate (2024). The court noted that the case against Dham was still at a preliminary stage involving scrutiny of documents.

Dham was arrested in July 2024 in connection with alleged fraud and diversion of public funds from IDBI Bank and Bank of Maharashtra, reportedly amounting to hundreds of crores. At the time of the hearing, he was the only one arrested among 28 accused, and the trial had not yet begun. The prosecution had cited more than 200 witnesses, with evidence largely documentary in nature.

The court clarified that economic offences cannot be treated as a single category for denying bail, as cases vary in complexity. Citing the V Senthil Balaji ruling, the bench said that under laws like the PMLA, where the maximum sentence is seven years, prolonged incarceration pending trial may justify bail when delays are not attributable to the accused.