Sc gives bail to AAP’s Vijay Nair: Right to liberty is Sacrosanct

Contact Counsellor

CategoryPolity

Last Updated04/09/2024

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to Vijay Nair in the case booked by the Enforcement Directorate under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)

The Supreme Court of India recently granted bail to Vijay Nair, Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) communications in-charge, in a case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
This case is linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. The Court's decision underscores the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially when the accused has already been in custody for a significant duration without trial commencement.

A bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S.V. N Bhatti highlighted that Vijay Nair had been in custody for 23 months as an undertrial, a duration that cannot be justified given that the maximum sentence for the alleged offense is seven years.
The Court emphasized that Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to personal liberty, must be respected even in cases involving stringent legal provisions.
The bench pointed out that keeping Nair in custody for such an extended period without trial commencement could be perceived as a form of punishment without a verdict.
The Court reiterated the universal legal principle that bail should be the norm, and jail should be the exception. This principle is particularly relevant in cases where the accused has been detained for a prolonged period without the trial progressing significantly.
The Court's decision reflects a commitment to uphold the right to liberty, emphasizing that extended pre-trial detention undermines this fundamental right.

Senior Advocate A.M. Singhvi, representing Vijay Nair, argued that Nair's case is comparable to that of former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, who was granted bail by the Supreme Court due to delays in the trial process.
Singhvi pointed out that the ED had introduced a large number of witnesses, which would inevitably prolong the trial.
He further noted that Nair had already spent 672 days in custody, a period that far exceeds reasonable pre-trial detention.
Singhvi also referenced the case of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who was granted bail in a related PMLA case. He argued that the ED had not identified Nair as the mastermind of the alleged scam but merely as an important player, which should not warrant such prolonged incarceration without trial.

Opposing the bail plea, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju argued that Vijay Nair, despite being AAP’s media in-charge, was involved as a middleman in the alleged receipt of kickbacks related to the excise policy scam.
Raju contended that Nair’s actions did not fall under the purview of Section 45 of the PMLA, which places stringent conditions on granting bail.
Raju also accused Nair of employing delaying tactics in the trial court by filing multiple applications unrelated to the prosecution's core documents.
He argued that such tactics were designed to prolong the trial process, thereby allowing Nair to seek bail on the grounds of delayed justice.