Rajasthan High Court Upholds Right to Speedy Trial for Approvers in High-Profile Kidney Racket Case

Court Directs Expedited Proceedings Amidst Concerns of Prolonged Detention Violating Article 21

In a significant decision, the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, presided over by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, addressed the issue of prolonged detention without trial in the high-profile illegal kidney transplantation case involving foreign nationals. The Court emphasized the fundamental right to a speedy trial, safeguarded under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, extending this protection to all individuals, including foreign nationals.

The case revolved around the petitioners, Nurul Islam Son and others, who became approvers after revealing crucial information about a kidney transplantation racket based in Jaipur. Despite their cooperation, the petitioners, who are Bangladeshi nationals, have remained in custody since April 2024, with the trial yet to commence.

The defense, represented by Mr. K.C. Sharma, argued that the prolonged detention violated the petitioners' right to personal liberty and a speedy trial, as enshrined in Article 21. The prosecution, led by Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG, contended that Section 306(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates the detention of approvers until their statements are recorded in court.

Justice Dhand, acknowledging the statutory provision, highlighted the necessity to balance legal mandates with constitutional rights. Drawing upon precedents, including the landmark Hussainara Khatoon and Sunil Batra cases, the Court underscored the judiciary's responsibility to ensure that detention, even when lawful, must be reasonable, fair, and just.

In its directive, the Court instructed the Trial Court to expedite proceedings by prioritizing the framing of charges and the recording of the petitioners' statements. It emphasized that unnecessary delays, often caused by frivolous applications, must be curtailed to uphold the petitioners' constitutional rights.

The Court also granted the petitioners the liberty to seek bail post the recording of their statements, underscoring the High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to intervene in exceptional circumstances where prolonged detention could contravene Article 21.

This decision highlights the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law while ensuring that legal procedures do not infringe upon fundamental rights, setting a precedent for cases involving foreign nationals and approvers in criminal trials.

Bottom Line:

Approver in a criminal case cannot be granted bail under Section 306(4) Cr.P.C. until their statements are recorded before the Trial Court. However, prolonged detention without trial can be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, and the right to a fair and speedy trial is a fundamental right applicable to all persons, including foreign nationals.

Statutory provision(s): Section 306(4) Cr.P.C., Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Nurul Islam Son v. Rajasthan Govt., (Rajasthan)(Jaipur Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2815057