Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J
Guddu Soubhan Harijan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant arrested and in custody (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments by applicant's advocate (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. prosecution's submissions (Para 7) |
| 4. court's review of the case (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. right to speedy trial emphasized (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. bail granted with conditions (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGEMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Talreja, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.Yadav, learned APP for Respondent – State.
3. Applicant is arrested on 13.02.2018 and has been in custody for almost 7 years till date. His several Bail Applications before the Sessions Court have been dismissed previously. After the present Application was filed, Applicant did not have representation and sought legal aid. Advocate Mr. Ajay Talreja is appointed to represent and espouse the cause of Applicant. He would draw my attention to the FIR appended at page No.9 of the Application and would contend that it is borne out from the record that the 3 Accused namely Accused No.1 Mohd. Karim Alias Kalim, Accused No.2 – Sainath Anil Devkar and Accused No.3 – present Applicant Guddu Soubhan Harijan had a previous enmity with the victim and had called him at the incident
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is fundamental, and bail is the rule while jail is the exception, especially when trial has not commenced for an extended period.
The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly in cases of long incarceration without trial, invoking the right to speedy justice under Article 21.
The right to speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged incarceration without trial necessitates bail, emphasizing that bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21, necessitating bail for the accused.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21, warranting bail as the rule and refusal as the exception.
The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception is reinforced, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and the presumption of innocence.
The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly for under-trials with prolonged incarceration, highlighting the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial is unjustifiable, especially in the absence of compelling evidence against the accused.
The court emphasizes that prolonged incarceration violates the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, establishing that bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception is reaffirmed, especially when an accused has been in custody for an extended period without trial progress.
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
