India, Jan. 20 -- If there are two sets of cases that have tested the Indian judiciary's commitment to personal liberty in recent years, it is the 2018 Bhima Koregaon and the 2020 Delhi riots cases. In both instances, a number of activists were incarcerated on very serious charges under draconian laws, with the protracted delay on proceeding towards trial raising questions about the prosecution's strategy and triggering the demand for bail. But the judiciary has appeared hesitant in granting bail on account of delay in the politically sensitive cases, the latest example being the Supreme Court refusing relief to student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam earlier this month. Now, former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has said bail should be the rule if an expeditious trial proves impossible in a case, commenting on the repeated denial of bail to Khalid. Speaking at the Jaipur Literature Festival, he said pretrial detention cannot be a form of punishment. "If a person is jailed for five to seven years before trial and then is acquitted finally, how would you compensate for that lost time? . unless the well-settled exceptions are made out in a particular case, the accused is entitled to bail," he added. Chandrachud may have diagnosed the problem correctly, but the statement would have held greater weight if it had been made during his stint at the helm of India's judiciary. It must be noted that the Khalid case, in particular, saw little movement during that time - though the former CJI has argued that the delay was partially due to defence requests - and his stint was also dogged by allegations surrounding the assignment of politically sensitive cases in the top court. In some politically sensitive cases, such as the 2020 Delhi riots, there appears to be an incongruity between the seriousness of the charges levelled and the prosecution's motivation to expeditiously push for a trial. The judiciary has not been energetic either in securing personal liberty, preferring instead to strike a balance between national security and the right to bail. This newspaper has noted that such stances not only narrow the window for relief under stringent laws but also run contrary to many weekend lectures and post-retirement homilies in praise of personal liberty. To ensure that pretrial detention is a rare occurrence, a structural shift in judicial doctrine is required. Mere words will achieve little....