Supreme Court Urges Delhi High Court to Expedite Decision on Satyendar Jain’s Default Bail Plea
Background
On June 25, 2024, the Supreme Court of India emphasized the importance of promptly addressing bail applications, urging the Delhi High Court to decide the default bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain without unnecessary delays. Jain’s challenge stemmed from the Delhi High Court’s decision to adjourn his bail plea to July 09, 2024, which he contested, claiming the adjournment was excessively long and unwarranted.
Supreme Court Hearing
A Vacation Bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti heard Jain’s plea. Senior Advocate Dr. AM Singhvi, representing Jain, argued that the Delhi High Court had erred in granting a six-week adjournment, especially given the substantial legal question involved—whether an incomplete chargesheet could be filed by the investigating agency to undermine the right to default bail. Dr. Singhvi pointed out that this legal issue was currently under consideration by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court and requested that Jain’s petition be tagged along with those pending petitions.
Court’s Observations
Justice Misra noted that since the legal issue was under consideration by a larger three-judge bench, it would not be appropriate for the present two-judge bench to delve into the merits of Jain’s plea. Justice Misra suggested that Jain should await the final decision of the High Court. The bench concluded that the High Court should decide the matter on its own merits and that if Jain was aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, he could then challenge it.
Disposition of the Petition
The Supreme Court disposed of the petition, urging the Delhi High Court to take a timely decision on the bail plea. The order stated:
“This petition is against an order of the Delhi High Court adjourning the hearing of the bail application to 09.07.2024. Mr. Singhvi submits that the question of law which would govern the decision of the High Court is engaging the attention of a three-judge bench of this Court and therefore it is appropriate that this matter is tagged with that matter. We do not find any merit in the submission because the High Court will decide the matter on its own merits and if the petitioner is aggrieved with the High Court’s order, he can challenge it.”
Dr. Singhvi further requested the Supreme Court to observe that the High Court should decide the matter on the next listed date. The Supreme Court acknowledged this, emphasizing that bail applications should not be unnecessarily adjourned, expressing hope and trust that the High Court would take a call on the matter promptly.
Case Background
Satyendar Jain was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on May 30, 2022, under charges of money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). He, along with others, was accused of laundering money through three companies during 2010-12 and 2015-16. In April last year, Jain’s earlier bail application was denied by the Delhi High Court on the grounds of his influence and potential to tamper with evidence.
Jain remained in custody until the Supreme Court granted him interim bail on health grounds on May 26, 2023, which was subsequently extended on multiple occasions. However, in March this year, the Supreme Court, while refusing to grant him regular bail, also cancelled his interim bail and ordered him to surrender forthwith. This order was delivered by a bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal.
Case Details
case title:- “Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement” (SLP(Crl) No. 8228/2024).
