Headline
The Supreme Court of India gave split decision on plea of Tahir Hussain for interim bail to campaign in Delhi elections
Summary
A bench of 2 judges of the Supreme Court of India gave a split verdict on Tahir Hussain’s plea asking for interim bail to campaign for the Delhi Assembly elections. Justice Pankaj Mithal dismissed the petition stating risks of misuse, while Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah gave conditional interim bail, stating prolonged custody and fairness. The matter is now referred to the Chief Justice for consideration.
Key Facts
- Case Name: Mohd Tahir Hussain vs State of NCT of Delhi,
- Judges Name: Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah.
- Tahir Hussain, accused in the murder of IB staffer Ankit Sharma during the Delhi riots in 2020, sought bail to contest election from Mustafabad.
- Justice Pankaj Mithal-refused bail, stating that it can influence witnesses and disrupt trial. Shown the Pandora’s box argument, saying every undertrial might misuse such relief.
- Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah: permitted interim bail until 4th February 2024, stating the 5 year custody period and conditional campaigning.
Legal Insights
- Justice Pankaj Mithal stressed that contesting elections is not a fundamental right and also mentioned Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act.
- Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed the delay of trial and showed the significance of Article 21 of Indian Constitution in ensuring a fair and just opportunity.
Impact
The split verdict of the court shows the judicial balance between electoral rights and maintaining the integrity of criminal trials.
Why It Matters
The decision of the Supreme Court sets a precedent on undertrials contesting elections and stresses on the role of judiciary in balancing rights and justice.
Source:
