Text

Shoma Kanti Sen v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2024)

---

Facts
In the sacred corridors of justice, a saga started with the arrest on June 6, 2018, of Shoma Kanti
Sen. She was accused of instigating disturbances at the Elgar Parishad conference in Pune and
charged by the State for associations with the proscribed Communist Party of India (Maoist),
under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). The investigation was
transferred from the State Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), and multiple
chargesheets were submitted against Sen and others.

Issues:
Did the prolonged detention of Shoma Kanti Sen, without trial, infringe upon her fundamental
rights?
Was prima facie evidence sufficient to support the serious allegations under the UAPA against
her?
Must her age and health conditions influence the grant of bail?

Arguments of Both Sides:

Appellant (Shoma Kanti Sen):
Violation of Basic Rights: The defense team for Sen argued that her extended detention, more
than six years without trial, violated her right to be tried speedily.
Absence of Evidence: They maintained the absence of concrete evidence against her in relation
to terrorist activities, emphasizing that association or ideological inclination cannot be treated as
criminal activity.
Humanitarian Considerations: Sen’s advanced years and failing health were cited as compelling
reasons why she should be granted bail.

Respondent (State of Maharashtra & NIA):
Severity of Charges: The prosecution suggested that the seriousness of the charge under the
UAPA warrants stern scrutiny and sanctions extensive detention.

Risk of Abscondence: They dreaded release on bail because it might lead to Sen escaping the
process of law due to the nature of the accusations.
Potential Impact on Witnesses: The State had argued that her release may result in tampering
with evidence or meddling with witnesses and thereby frustrate justice.

Held:
In a path-breaking verdict echoing the annals of jurisprudence, the Supreme Court granted bail to
Shoma Kanti Sen by emphasizing the following:
Right to Speedy Trial: The Court recalled that the State cannot keep someone in custody
indefinitely without initiating a trial, which is against constitutional rights, and the State must
ensure speedy justice.
No prima Facie Evidence: The prosecution was observed to have no concrete evidence putting
Sen squarely under the allegations of terrorist activities, and her detention for an extended period
was not justifiable.
Humanitarian Considerations: Considering her age and weak state of health, the Court deemed it
humanitarian and just to grant her bail under specific conditions in order to limit any potential
risks.

---

Detail Information

Title

Shoma Kanti Sen v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2024)

Court

: supreme court.,

Lenght/Sections/Order/Rules

-

Language

English

Case Number/Citation

Criminal Appeal No. 2595 of 2023

Matter(s)

-

Councels

Appellant Senior Counsel Anand Grover, along with Advocates Paras Nath Singh and Nupur Kumar. Respondent Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj, along with Advocates Omkar Deshpande and others.

Statement of Responsibility

Sneha Awasthi, Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur

See Also

File Attachment

Comments

---

You must be logged in to post a comment