JAIPUR: Prolonged prison terms without trial undermine constitutional justice and demand bail, former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said Sunday, citing cases such as Umar Khalid’s and warning courts to rigorously test national security claims.Speaking at Jaipur Literature Festival, Chandrachud said when state invokes national security, “the court is duty bound to carefully scrutinise whether national security is involved and whether the detention of the accused is proportional”.Khalid, a former JNU student leader, has been in custody since 2020 under UAPA in connection with an alleged conspiracy behind communal violence in northeast Delhi that killed over 50 people. Khalid denies the charges. He has been repeatedly denied bail and his trial has yet to begin.“In cases like this, where trials do not begin years after arrest, you must necessarily take into consideration right to an expeditious trial,” Chandrachud said. “If an expeditious trial is not possible under present conditions, then bail should be rule and not exception.”The ex-CJI said stringent national security laws had distorted bail jurisprudence by reversing presumption of innocence. “A lot of our laws… turned law on its head by substituting presumption of innocence with almost presumption of guilt,” he said.Chandrachud traced the crisis to lower courts, which form first point of contact for citizens. Trial judges increasingly hesitate to grant bail, not because law requires denial, but because fear shapes decisions he said. “There is a sense of all-pervading fear — if I grant bail, will my motives be questioned?” he said, describing a system where lower courts defer to higher courts, creating a gridlock.On judicial corruption, Chandrachud struck a measured note. “Yes, there is corruption in judiciary, but that is exaggerated,” he said, adding that judges in higher office face higher standards and allegations must be dealt with firmly within the system.Calling for institutional reform, he described India’s democracy as vibrant yet imperfect. “We live with imperfections and try to improve upon them for future,” he said.Defending the collegium system for judicial appointments while conceding flaws, Chandrachud said: “As a judge, I was a soldier who implemented the collegium system”, but as a citizen he saw need for reform, cautioning that the “devil lies in small print”.He also addressed the controversy over post-retirement govt roles for judges. While the Constitution places no bar, such appointments generate discomfort, he said, and civil society often questions past judgments if posts follow soon after retirement, perceptions he described as largely unfair.