Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPANKAR DATTA AND MANMOHAN, JJ.
Kamlesh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. 18020/2024]
Decided on : 20-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. leave granted to appeal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual basis of appellant's charges. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. court examines evidentiary concerns. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. bail granted with conditions. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. clarifications and encouragement to expedite trial. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated April 8, 2024 has dismissed the appellant's prayer for bail.
3. The appellant, figuring as an accused in FIR No. 49 dated 01/03/2021 registered with Police Station Ganganagar, Suratgarh Sadar, has been in custody since then. It is alleged in the FIR that the appellant committed offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 8, 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985,
4. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials on record.
5. It is submitted that out of 17 (seventeen) witnesses, only 1 (one) witness has been examined till date. That apart, there are no independent witnesses to the seizure.
6. Having regard to the long period of incarceration undergone by the appellant, the absence of any independent witness to the seizure and that the pace of trial is rather slow, meaning thereby that the trial court would take some time to complete the trial, we are inclined to accept the present appeal.
7. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment and order.
8. The appellant shall be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the trial court.
9. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.
10. The appellant shall, however, appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless exempted; and should the appellant fail to appear on any date without justifiable cause or breach any of the terms and conditions for grant of bail, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
11. The trial court is encouraged to conclude the trial, as early as possible, in accordance with law.
12. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on the aforesaid terms.
13. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
The court granted bail based on the lengthy incarceration of the appellant and insufficient witness examination, emphasizing the need for timely judicial proceedings.
The court granted bail to a septuagenarian accused, emphasizing that prolonged detention pending trial is unwarranted, while clarifying that this does not affect the merits of the case.
Bail granted due to lack of criminal antecedents and prolonged incarceration.
The right to life and personal liberty includes the right to speedy trial, and courts should interfere to secure the personal liberty of an under trial when the trial is being delayed for reasons not....
Prolonged detention without trial and lack of witness examination can justify the granting of bail, even in cases involving serious charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The delayed trial and long custody of the petitioner, coupled with the applicability of Section 436(a) of Cr.P.C. to special acts, influenced the court's decision to grant regular bail.
Bail is the rule at the pre-conviction stage, and prolonged incarceration without trial is unjustified, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
