Supreme Court expressed displeasure : The accused, who has been in jail for 11 years, has not been charged, asked why it is getting delayed

 | 
Supreme Court expressed displeasure : The accused, who has been in jail for 11 years, has not been charged, asked why it is getting delayed

The Supreme Court expressed displeasure over the non-framing of charges against an accused, who has been in jail for 11 years, in the 1993 Rajdhani Express and other trains serial blasts case. The court said that the accused should either be convicted or acquitted. Why is it getting delayed?


Supreme Court expressed displeasure : The accused, who has been in jail for 11 years, has not been charged, asked why it is getting delayed


Underlining the right of speedy trial, the top court has sought a report from the judge of the special TADA court in Ajmer as to why charges were not framed against Hamir Ui Uddin. A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah directed the special judge to submit the report within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. It also said that it should be clear in the report why the charges have not been framed so far. The bench asked the Registrar (Judicial) to send a copy of the order directly to the judge and a copy through the Registrar (Judicial) of the Rajasthan High Court.


During the hearing of the case held recently, advocate Shoaib Alam, appearing for Hamir, said that the petitioner is in custody since 2010 but charges have not been framed and the trial is yet to begin. He said that the indefinite detention of an accused without trial is a gross abuse of the rights of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution. He argued that the special TADA court should have granted bail to the petitioner as there is no possibility of the trial being concluded in the near future. Hammer, in his petition, has challenged the dismissal of the bail application by the TADA court dated March 27, 2019.

Supreme Court expressed displeasure : The accused, who has been in jail for 11 years, has not been charged, asked why it is getting delayed

The bench said, at least there should be a trial

Rajasthan government's counsel Vishal Meghwal admitted that charges have not been framed against the accused, but argued that he was absconding for nearly 15 years. The bench then asked why charges were not framed when he is in custody since 2010. The accused is entitled to a speedy trial. Convict him or acquit him, we have no problem with it but at least do a trial. He cannot be detained indefinitely without trial. To this, Meghwal argued that one of the co-accused, Abdul Karim Tundra, is lodged in Ghaziabad jail as the main reason for the delay in the framing of charges. The bench said that then either you separate the trial or you can combine the trial with its case but at least start the trial. Alam said the state has not mentioned the Tundra case in its counter-affidavit.

accused of bomb blasts in many trains

According to the prosecution, on December 5-6, 1993, bomb blasts took place on Bombay-New Delhi, New Delhi-Howrah, and Howrah-New Delhi Rajdhani trains and Surat-Baroda Flying Queen Express and AP Express. Two passengers were killed and 22 injured in these explosions. Cases were registered in this regard in Kota, Valsad, Kanpur, Allahabad, and Malkaj-Giri. Later these cases were transferred to CBI and re-trials were registered under TADA in Jaipur, Ahmedabad, Lucknow, and Hyderabad. The investigation found that the bomb blast was the result of a single conspiracy and hence all the cases were clubbed together. A charge sheet was filed against 13 accused arrested by the CBI on August 25, 1994. Nine accused were absconding. Hair was shown absconding. Hair was arrested by Lucknow in 2010.