Duty of state to provide resources for speedy trial before opposing bail

If the State or prosecuting agency fails to provide adequate judicial infrastructure, personnel, or procedural mechanisms to guarantee a speedy trial, it loses the equitable standing to oppose bail on grounds of crime gravity. The constitutional obligation to ensure prompt justice rests squarely upon the State and its specialized investigative arms. When courts face massive backlogs, thousands of pages of unscrutinized evidence, and hundreds of listed witnesses, trials inevitably take years to commence and conclude. Prosecuting agencies cannot demand that undertrials remain incarcerated indefinitely while the state machinery slowly navigates procedural hurdles. Where speedy trial guarantees cannot be operationalized in practice, personal liberty under Article 21 must be protected through conditional release on bail. Thus, institutional inability to conduct prompt trials mandates the liberal exercise of judicial discretion in granting bail. (Arvind Dham v. Directorate of Enforcement | 2026 INSC 12)