Yumlembam Jiban Singh Bail: Supreme Court Hears Plea Over Slow Trial

• Yumlembam Jiban Singh, an accused in the Manipur Kuki women paraded naked case, sought bail from the Supreme Court.
• His bail application cited the slow progress of the trial as the primary reason for his request.
• Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat highlighted that only one of three victims had been fully examined, despite previous court orders to expedite proceedings.
• The prosecution stated that new dates for evidence recording were set, and the third victim's cross-examination was pending.
• The Supreme Court continues to scrutinize trial delays, emphasizing the need for expeditious proceedings even in sensitive cases.

This development signals the Supreme Court's continued emphasis on expeditious trial proceedings, even in high-profile and sensitive cases.

Yumlembam Jiban Singh, an individual accused in the deeply disturbing case involving the public parading of three Kuki-Zo women during the 2023 Manipur violence, recently approached the Supreme Court with a request for bail. His application highlighted the exceptionally slow pace of the ongoing trial as the primary justification for his plea, arguing that the protracted proceedings warranted his release.

Representing Yumlembam Jiban Singh before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat underscored the significant delays plaguing the trial. Farasat emphasized that this sluggish progress persisted despite previous judicial directives aimed at accelerating the proceedings. This persistent lack of momentum formed the core of the argument for granting bail to Yumlembam Jiban Singh in the Manipur Kuki women paraded naked case.

During the hearing, a Supreme Court Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana was apprised of the trial's current status. Farasat specifically referenced the Court's October 5 order, which had mandated the completion of evidence from all three victims involved in the case. However, the Court was informed that, to date, only one of the three victims had undergone a full examination.

Farasat further elaborated that while the examination-in-chief for the third victim had been concluded, her crucial cross-examination remained outstanding. He expressed frustration over the situation, stating that despite multiple judicial orders issued since July, merely "one and a half witnesses" had been examined, reflecting the stark reality of the trial's progress on the ground. In response, Additional Solicitor General Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare, appearing for the prosecution, informed the bench that the trial court had scheduled consecutive dates—October 13, 16, 18, and 19—for the recording of evidence. Thakare confirmed the completion of the third victim's examination-in-chief and assured the Court that her remaining cross-examination would proceed on these newly designated dates. Farasat, however, pointed out that similar schedules had been established previously without yielding the desired acceleration.

This development signals the Supreme Court's continued emphasis on expeditious trial proceedings, even in high-profile and sensitive cases. The Court's active engagement in monitoring the progress of the trial, as evidenced by its previous orders and the current hearing on Yumlembam Jiban Singh's bail Supreme Court plea, highlights its commitment to ensuring timely justice.

Lawyers handling criminal matters, particularly those with prolonged trials, should note this as a potential ground for seeking bail or expediting proceedings for their clients, citing the Court's scrutiny of delays. The persistent delays in the Manipur Kuki women paraded naked case, despite specific judicial directives, underscore the challenges in accelerating complex legal processes, but also reinforce the judiciary's role in holding trial courts accountable for progress.

This development signals the Supreme Court's continued emphasis on expeditious trial proceedings, even in high-profile and sensitive cases. Lawyers handling criminal matters, particularly those with prolonged trials, should note this as a potential ground for seeking bail or expediting proceedings for their clients, citing the Court's scrutiny of delays.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench