New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked the Bombay High Court and the Maharashtra government to evolve a mechanism to ensure that accused are produced before trial judges either physically or virtually on every date so that the trial is not prolonged.

The apex court, while dealing with an appeal challenging the Bombay High Court order denying bail to an accused, said a “sorry state of affairs” was being depicted as the trial proceedings in the case was being prolonged due to non-production of appellant before the trial judge either physically or virtually.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan was informed that this was not a solitary case but in many cases, such a difficulty arises.

“We, therefore, direct the registrar general of the high court of judicature at Bombay, secretary, Home, state of Maharashtra and secretary, Law and Justice, state of Maharashtra to sit together and evolve a mechanism to ensure that the accused are produced before the trial judge either physically or virtually on every date and the trial is not permitted to be prolonged on the ground of non-production of the accused persons,” the bench said.

In its order passed on December 18, the apex court noted that material placed on record revealed that in the last six years, out of 102 dates, the accused was not produced before the court either physically or through virtual mode on most of the dates.

“We may say with anguish that this is a very sorry state of affairs. If an accused is incarcerated for a period of approximately five years without even framing of charges, leave aside the right of speedy trial being affected, it would amount to imposing sentence without trial,” the bench said.

It said such a prolonged delay was also not in the interest of the rights of the victim.

The bench said a copy of its order be forwarded to the registrar general of the high court and the secretaries of Home and Law and Justice of Maharashtra government forthwith for necessary action.

The bench delivered its verdict on the appeal challenging an order of the high court which had rejected the bail plea of the appellant in a case registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).

The apex court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant on a bond of Rs 50,000 with one or more sureties in the like amount.

It directed that the appellant shall continue to appear before the special judge on every date regularly.