IS FREEDOM OF INDIVIDUAL
A VARIABLE
IN THE PROCESS OF IMPARTING JUSTICE
The context of this thought can be best explained by an analogy, that is, whether oxygen is a variable, and availability of oxygen to a living body can be controlled during the life time. The answer is simple no. It is not available for any living body neither to control the availability of oxygen nor to disturb the body constituted to absorb oxygen. Oxygen is not a variable but indispensible. During the life time of an individual freedom is similar to oxygen, for blossoming of life of an individual. Freedom is not a variable but indispensible.
In a democratic set up the entire effort is to safe guard freedom in its generic form in the context of co-existence of human beings harmoniously.
The introspection is whether judiciary in India is dealing freedom of individual in this context. Definitely certain events touching life sparks off certain thought process. Without confining to any individual the consequential thought should be introspected dispassionately in the larger context.
In the process of imparting justice, if the prescripttion of law to meet the ends of justice, punishment is deprivation of freedom of an individual for remaining part of life or specified shorter period, then whether pending adjudication can freedom of individual be deprived in any other manner except in nature of punishment.
If a person can be admitted on bail, whether principles governing grant of bail fluctuate on the basis of hierarchy of courts. Whenever a application for admitting a person on bail is made, such person should be admitted on bail on such terms and conditions unique to each individual corresponding to the gravity of the offence alleged pending disposal of the application, apply the principles of due process of law, evaluate the material available and also obtain material to the satisfaction of the court. Thereafter apparently if there is threat that the person is unfit to live in the society and very presence of such person in society is threat for others then such person can be restrained in public life and government could take care of such individuals in its custody. But, to detain a person first, in the period of convenience to evaluate available material and acquired material, thereafter admit a person on bail, is almost practicing euthanasia in the matter of freedom of an individual. The period of lost freedom cannot be regained in life. It is a deprivation permanent in nature and is punishment. The fact of future life is available and period lost has faded in it significance or in pursuit of procedural justice is like deprive oxygen to life of person first then decide whether to give oxygen or not, unmindful of period to take such decision, and later take decision to give oxygen. Well, whether the person is alive or dead would become not relevant.
We the people have given on to ourselves a constitution with absolute guarantee of freedom of individual. For that purpose we have given on to ourselves courts. The paramount duty of court is to protect freedom of individual, not take away freedom and restore it. Freedom is not a variable it is indispensible. To deprive freedom of individual contrary to the prescripttion of law available in the nature of punishment is murder of democracy. Despite the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India eloquently unfolding the principles guiding admission of person on bail, the source of thinking that application of bail is expression of non cooperation is not erased. When a person applies for bail, it means a citizen is submitting to the jurisdiction of rule of law and ready to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed. It is expression of cooperation. The maturity in democracy, let alone judiciary, is to encourage such citizens admit on bail and impose conditions favoring securing the presence of the individual as and when required.
But, with this long history, such enlightening judgments available in the form of precedents, to detain a citizen first, allow passage of period of convenience to evaluate the case and thereafter admit on bail is expression of obscurity at its peak. The reason to detain a person or the period detained is not even dealt with. If at all one is looking for the area of violation of principles of natural justice and fair play, the period of detention unreasoned is the optimal expression of such violation.
It is disheartening, disgusting and in the spirit of THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, cold blooded murder of freedom of individual. It is practice of euthanasia, in the context of freedom of individual.
