The right to a speedy trial and prolonged incarceration of an under-trial prisoner (over 13 years in this case) outweighs the gravity of the offence, including double murder, as indefinite detention violates the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty.

O R D E R

1. Applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.116/2013 dated 26.02.2013, registered at P.S. Mandawali, for commission of offences under Sections 364A /302/201/120B/34 IPC.

2. Sh. Vaish, learned counsel for the applicant submits that cardinal fundamental principle of the criminal law is that every accused is presumed to be innocent, unless and until held guilty. He states that the continuous incarceration of the applicant, for more than 13 years, violates his fundamental right to life, personal liberty and to have a speedy trial. He submits that pre-verdict incarceration is, virtually, equivalent to him being awarded with a life sentence. He also refers to order passed by this Court way back on 21.02.2022, when the applicant had, lastly, come to this Court seeking bail. Such bail application was disposed of by this Court while directing the learned Trial Court to make best endeavour to complete the trial, as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within the period of four months. The applicant was also simultaneously granted liberty to raise all grounds before the learned Trial Court. More than four years have elapsed after the abovesaid order of this Court, the trial, it seems, is yet not over.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after testimony of Inspector Sunder Singh was recorded by the learned Trial Court, prosecution expressed its inclination to recall PW-3 Yogita and PW-6 Manoj for identification of case property and such move, in itself, is indicative of the fact that prosecution is not inclined to wind up the trial.

4. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant, who both have joined the proceedings through video-conferencing, submit that the next date before the learned Trial Court is 7th instant and, in all probabilities, prosecution would close its evidence. They submit that since the case is now at fag end of its journey, the present application may be dismissed as there is a chance that applicant may abscond, if enlarged on bail.

5. There is, in fact, a bit of dilemma in the mind of the Court. On one hand, there is long incarceration and on the other, the matter has enormous gravity.

6. The allegations are, indubitably, serious in nature as according to the case of prosecution, the applicant, along with three other accused persons, entered into a criminal conspiracy and in pursuance to such conspiracy, two minor children, aged five years and seven years, were kidnapped, with a ransom demand of Rs.30,00,000/-.

7. The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by their mother on 26.02.2013 and, eventually, the dead bodies of the abovesaid two children were recovered on 02.03.2013. The extensive investigation led to the arrest of four accused persons, including the applicant herein. The applicant is stated to be a distant relative of the family of the complainant as the minor children in question used to call him ‘mama’ (maternal uncle). He is stated to be the mastermind behind the entire controversy. It is claimed that the school bag of one of the deceased child was also recovered from his possession.

8. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant submit that no case would ever be fool proof and there would be minor discrepancy in every case and the attempt of the applicant, at this juncture, is to draw and dig out undue advantage from minor and insignificant discrepancies and contradictions. They submit that since trial is with respect to the brutal murder of two minors, it will not be appropriate for this Court to appreciate the evidence and in this regard, they strongly rely on X vs. State of Rajasthan : 2024 INSC 909.

9. Sh. Vaish, learned counsel for the applicant, while refuting the above, submits that though, there are, indeed, various discrepancies which are major in nature and which go to the root of the matter and there are several broken links, he, at the moment,