This article by Gautam Bhatia critically examines the impact of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on the Indian criminal justice system, focusing on the case of Umar Khalid.
Key Arguments:
UAPA undermines the principle of "innocent until proven guilty": By allowing the court to consider the "prima facie" truth of the accusations against the accused during the bail hearing, the UAPA effectively shifts the burden of proof and undermines the presumption of innocence.
Bail hearings become mini-trials: The UAPA transforms bail hearings into de facto trials, where the prosecution presents its case without the defense having the opportunity to fully contest it. This leads to prolonged detention and effectively pre-judges the accused.
Lack of judicial scrutiny: The Supreme Court's judgment in the National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali further restricts judicial scrutiny of the police case during bail hearings, exacerbating the problem.
Prolonged detention and potential for injustice: The combination of these factors leads to prolonged detention for accused individuals, even when they may ultimately be acquitted. This creates a significant risk of injustice.
The article highlights the serious concerns regarding the UAPA's impact on the Indian criminal justice system and its potential for abuse.
It emphasizes the need for judicial reforms to ensure that the rights of the accused are upheld and that the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is truly respected.
COMMENTS