In a significant ruling that reinforces a fundamental legal tenet, the Meghalaya High Court has granted anticipatory bail to three individuals accused in a mob lynching case from June 2025 that resulted in one death. The court, presided over by Justice W Diengdoh, underscored the cardinal principle of bail jurisprudence that an undertrial is innocent until proven guilty.
The Court's Reasoning and Legal Principle
While acknowledging the gravity of the incident, where a person lost his life to an enraged mob, Justice Diengdoh's order firmly rested on established legal doctrine. "Though the nature of the incident is serious and the fact that a person has lost his life due to the action of an enraged mob, nevertheless, it is also very important to maintain the well-settled and cardinal principle of bail jurisprudence that an accused person/under trial is said to be innocent until proven guilty," the court observed.
The court also factored in the principle of parity, noting that other accused in the same case had already been granted bail. The only new development was that the investigating officer had filed a chargesheet naming the three petitioners. The state prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutors S Sengupta and H Kharmih, did not offer a "strong objection" to the bail plea, acknowledging that others had been released based on their degree of involvement.
Background of the Case and Arguments
The case stems from a violent event in June 2025, where the victim was allegedly targeted by a mob of approximately 500 people. The petitioners, through their counsel advocate S A Sheikh, claimed innocence and argued they were falsely implicated and not present at the scene. After their anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the trial court, they approached the High Court fearing imminent arrest.
Sheikh argued for bail on grounds of parity, since other accused had already been enlarged on bail. The state prosecution confirmed a prima facie case existed due to the filed chargesheet but did not strongly oppose the bail prayer.
The Final Ruling and Bail Conditions
Justice Diengdoh ruled that the core facts and circumstances of the case had remained unchanged, with the chargesheet being the sole new element. The court allowed the petition, making the interim bail absolute. "Be that as it may, the prayer of the petitioners in this petition is hereby allowed, and the interim bail granted is also made absolute," the order stated.
The court set specific conditions for their release in the event of arrest:
- They shall not abscond.
- They shall not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.
- They shall attend court proceedings as and when required.
This ruling, delivered on January 6, 2026, highlights the judiciary's ongoing balancing act between ensuring a fair trial for the accused and addressing the seriousness of allegations in sensitive cases like mob lynching.
