Abstract

The principle that “bail is the rule, jail is the exception” is meant to protect individual liberty – yet, in today’s India, the reality often falls short of that promise. Arbitrary arrests, long periods of pre-trial detention, and the difficulty of securing bail continue to plague the criminal justice system, especially for the poor and marginalized. This paper explores how the bail system, despite constitutional safeguards under Article 21 and established judicial principles, frequently operates in a way that undermines the presumption of innocence. By closely examining the legal provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and analyzing key Supreme Court decisions such as State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1977), Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. (2018), and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022), the study highlights both the progress made and the gaps that remain. Drawing from real-world cases, data on undertrial prisoners, and recent judicial observations, the paper argues for urgent reforms – from simplifying bail procedures to rethinking how courts assess flight risk and social background. Ultimately, the aim is to ask a simple but vital question: How can we make bail truly accessible for all, and not just for a privileged few? Ensuring that liberty is the norm, not the exception, is essential if India’s criminal justice system is to stay true to its constitutional values.

Keywords