The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed serious concern over the prolonged delay in the trial of an alleged office-bearer of the banned Popular Front of India (PFI), observing that an undertrial cannot be kept in custody indefinitely while the prosecution proposes to examine hundreds of witnesses.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana questioned the feasibility of conducting a trial involving 707 prosecution witnesses, including 67 protected witnesses, when the accused had already spent nearly four years in judicial custody without any meaningful progress in the proceedings.
The Court was hearing the bail petition filed by Shahid Khan, who is facing prosecution under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the Bench directed the Karnataka government to submit a comprehensive prosecution plan identifying the witnesses it proposes to examine, specifying the number of protected witnesses genuinely required and providing a realistic schedule for the completion of the trial.
According to the prosecution, Shahid Khan has been arrayed as Accused No. 14 in a criminal case alleging that office-bearers and members of the Popular Front of India entered into a criminal conspiracy to radicalise Muslim youth, mobilise funds for unlawful activities and wage war against the Government of India. The prosecution further alleged that the conspiracy formed part of a larger terrorist network and was connected with the murder of BJP Yuva Morcha leader Praveen Nettaru. Khan has been accused of serving as the District President of the PFI’s Davanagere Zone and participating in organisational meetings and recruitment activities between 2019 and 2022.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Khan had remained in custody for three years and ten months and that the trial had made negligible progress despite an earlier direction of the Supreme Court to expedite the proceedings. It was argued that although charges were framed in February 2026, only the testimony of the first prosecution witness had been recorded by August 2026. The petitioner also contended that the Karnataka High Court had failed to adequately examine the issue of prolonged incarceration and delay while considering his plea.
Opposing the bail application, the State argued that the allegations against the accused involved serious offences affecting national security and public order. The prosecution sought additional time to obtain instructions regarding the proposed course of the trial and the manner in which evidence would be recorded.
The Supreme Court, however, observed that the gravity of the allegations alone could not justify an indefinite trial or prolonged pre-trial detention. Stressing the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Bench questioned the practicality of examining more than 700 witnesses in a single criminal trial and suggested that the prosecution should first identify only those witnesses whose testimony is indispensable to establish its case. The Court indicated that a structured prosecution strategy was necessary to ensure the expeditious conduct of the trial and to prevent unnecessary delay.
The petitioner further informed the Bench that nine co-accused in the same case had already been granted bail and argued that his continued incarceration, despite the slow pace of the trial, warranted judicial intervention. Taking note of these submissions, the Supreme Court directed the Karnataka government to file a detailed prosecution plan setting out the proposed sequence of witnesses, the necessity of protected witnesses and a realistic timeline for completion of evidence. The matter has been listed for further hearing after the State places the required information before the Court.
The post Supreme Court flags delay in UAPA trial, seeks prosecution plan from Karnataka in PFI officebearer case appeared first on India Legal.