Bail – Denial – When not justified – Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to speedy trial – Applicability of, irrespective of the seriousness of crime – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.489B, 489C, 120B, 34 – National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – s.19 – Fake counterfeit Indian currency notes seized from the appellant-accused – In custody as an under-trial prisoner for four years – Bail denied:

Held: Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment – 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 u/Article 21, then it should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious – Howsoever serious a crime may be, an accused has a right to speedy trial – Article 21 applies irrespective of the nature of the crime – Petitioner is still an accused and not a convict – He has been in jail as an under-trial prisoner for four years – No charges have been framed till date – There are around eighty witnesses to be examined, no clarity as to when the trial will ultimately conclude – The over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be – Right of the accused to have a speedy trial was infringed thereby violating Article 21 – Impugned order passed by the High Court set aside – Appellant granted bail. [Paras 7, 8, 9, 19-21, 22, 23]

Criminal Law – Humanist approach towards delinquents – Need for – Discussed. [Para 18]