Orissa HC grants bail to juvenile accused, cites violation of right to speedy trial
The Orissa high court emphasised that the right to a speedy trial is ingrained in the fundamental right to life and personal liberty
The Orissa high court has granted bail to a man who had been detained for over seven years in connection with a murder case in 2018 when he was a juvenile, observing that such prolonged incarceration amounted to a violation of his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Justice G. Satapathy, while allowing the appeal filed by the minor directed that he be released on bail, setting aside the earlier order of the additional district judge-cum-special court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Cuttack, which had rejected his bail plea in November 2024.
The court said that despite the undertrial being lodged in an observation home since July 2018, the trial had made little progress. Of the total witnesses, only 14 had been examined, while the prosecution declined to examine seven others and now sought to examine a few more, including witnesses numbered 14, 22, 23, 24, and 27. “In such a situation, the trial would continue for some time,” the judge observed.
Emphasising that the right to a speedy trial is “ingrained in the fundamental right to life and personal liberty,” Justice Satapathy remarked that a detention spanning seven years was “long enough to be considered a violation” of this right. The court also referred to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which provides that a Child in Conflict with Law (CICL) should be granted bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that their release would bring them into association with known criminals, expose them to moral or physical danger, or defeat the ends of justice.
After examining the Social Investigation Report (SIR) submitted to the court, Justice Satapathy found no adverse observations against the juvenile that would justify continued detention. “Nowhere does this court find any adverse report against the appellant, who, being detained in observation home for seven years, is considered to be entitled to bail,” the order said.
The case dates back to 2018, when the accused, then a minor, was arrested along with others in the murder case of Priyaranjan Jena and theft of his valuables. He has since remained in detention, awaiting the conclusion of trial proceedings that have stretched across years.
The trial court had earlier sought six more months to complete the proceedings, but the high court observed that continued detention, especially of a juvenile, could no longer be justified. “When the trial is yet to be concluded even after more than seven years of detention, this court feels it proper to admit the appellant to bail,” Justice Satapathy held.
Allowing the appeal under Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice Act, the court directed that the accused be released on terms and conditions to be set by the trial court.
