The UAPA and the Crisis of Bail: When Process Becomes Punishment
UPSC Relevance
Prelims: Indian Polity and Governance (Fundamental Rights - Article 21, Judiciary, Key Legislations - UAPA).
Mains:
General Studies Paper 2 (Polity & Governance): Indian Constitution—significant provisions and basic structure; Fundamental Rights; Structure, organization and functioning of the Judiciary; Important aspects of governance.
General Studies Paper 3 (Internal Security): Linkages between development and spread of extremism; Role of external state and non-state actors in creating challenges to internal security; Security challenges and their management.
Key Highlights from the News
The article strongly argues that the stringent bail provisions in India's primary anti-terrorism law, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), lead to the bail hearing itself becoming the trial.
UAPA's bail provisions undermine the fundamental principle of "innocent until proven guilty" in ordinary criminal law.
Under UAPA: If the court finds the allegations in the police report to be prima facie true, the accused cannot be granted bail.
This results in individuals being imprisoned for years based solely on unilateral police claims, even before a trial, which amounts to a denial of justice.
The severity of this issue is exacerbated by the fact that trials in UAPA cases take years (often over 10 years) to complete, and the conviction rates under this law are very low.
The Supreme Court's judgment in National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2019) worsened this situation by further limiting the power of trial courts in granting bail.
The article concludes that it is essential to quash or reinterpret the bail provisions of this law to reduce their harshness to ensure justice.
COMMENTS