HC Drop Man Jail Term, Says 26 Yrs Trail for 3-Month Sentence Is Unjust

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has determined that punishing a man after a 26-year legal battle would contradict principles of justice. The court commuted his sentence to time already served, underscoring that the constitutional guarantee of prompt trial stands among citizens' most essential rights.

This verdict emerged from a revision plea submitted by a merchant who faced legal action at age 27 in 1999 when authorities discovered colored pulses at his shop. In 2007, Hisar's Chief Judicial Magistrate found him guilty, ordering three months' imprisonment plus a Rs 500 fine. Following his appeal's dismissal in 2010, he petitioned the high court, which stayed his sentence but couldn't hear the case for over 15 years due to overwhelming caseloads. 

Now 53, represented by counsel Salil Bali, his case finally reached Justice Deepak Gupta's bench, which considered the extraordinary 26-year span between the initial offense and final hearing. 

"The conviction has loomed over the petitioner for 26 years," the court remarked. "While one might easily dismiss this by noting he remained free on bail, few comprehend the psychological burden carried by someone with an unresolved conviction."

The bench also highlighted that no evidence suggested the petitioner deliberately prolonged proceedings. Instead, institutional backlog caused the delay entirely. Justice Gupta noted: "After this court admitted his revision petition in 2010, excessive pendency prevented its listing for final hearing until 2025—more than 15 years since admission."