In this Special Report, legal experts debate a Supreme Court judgment concerning bail provisions under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The discussion focuses on the balance between the gravity of alleged offences and the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21. One speaker argues that the judgment is ‘fair’ given the ‘draconian’ nature of the UAPA and the serious charges involving national sovereignty. Conversely, another expert criticizes the court’s framing, stating that ‘delays cannot be trumped’ is an overstatement that ignores proportionality. The debate highlights the tension between statutory bail restrictions and personal liberty.