Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13. He submits that due to the operation of the impugned order dated 23.12.2024, the trial in the instant case has come to a standstill and the pronouncement of order on second regular bail application of the applicant has been kept in abeyance for indefinite period. Even the last interim bail application seeking, inter alia, bail for attending Third Parliamentary Session has become infructuous on account of lack of clarity as to competence of the Special NIA Court, not a designated court for MPs/MLAs, to entertain the bail application of the petitioner who is a sitting MP.

22. To oppose the prayer of custody parole, Mr. Luthra has also drawn attention of this court to various orders passed by the learned Special Court (NIA). Vide order dated 08.04.2024, the learned Special Court restricted the phone call facilities of the applicant in jail after considering the fact that the said facilities were being misused by the applicant. Further, he submits that the application seeking interim bail/custody parole for filing nomination to contest in General Elections, 2024 was rejected vide order dated 27.04.2024, instead a direction was given to the Jail Superintendent to make necessary arrangements for the filing of nomination of the applicant while he remained in custody. He submits that again an interim bail application was filed by the applicant before the Special Court (NIA), however, the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 24.12.2024.

31. In the interregnum, the petitioner had also preferred an interim bail application to attend the Third Parliamentary Winter Session, till the pendency of second regular bail of the petitioner. However, the said application was withdrawn on 24.12.2024 as having become infructuous as the same was not decided since the administrative order was still awaited, and in the meanwhile, the Third Parliamentary Winter Session ended on 20.12.2024.

34. In Anita Kushwaha v. Pushap Sudan1 also, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that access to justice is a fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. If access to justice is a facet of fundamental rights, then non-availability of forum for disposal of applicant's application for bail, either interim or regular, renders the petitioner remediless for the time being, and concomitantly deprives him of the aforesaid right. This being the position, it is deemed appropriate that (2016) 8 SCC 509 in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case as noted above and in an attempt to balance the competing interests and rights, this Court would not completely negate petitioner's plea for custody parole to attend the Parliamentary session for the remaining two days on 11.02.2025 and 13.02.2025. However, to allay the apprehensions articulated by the respondent/NIA, appropriate conditions can be imposed.