Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J
Vivekanand Sudhir Pise @ Vicky – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Mr. Pandey, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Ganapthy, learned APP for State.
2. Present Application has been filed by Applicants who are arraigned as accused Nos. 14 and 15 for seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, "BNSS") in connection with Crime No. 129 of 2011 registered with Kurar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 342, 364, 395 , 511 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 (for short, " IPC "). Both Applicants are incarcerated in prison for the past more than 13 years 7 months and 11 days. Application is filed on 17.03.2025. Considering the long incarceration, Application is taken up for hearing.
3. Applicant No.1 - Accused No.14 was arrested on was arrested on 09.08.2011 whereas Applicant No. 2 - Accused No.15 was arrested on 17.08.2011. There is no doubt that crime in the present case is a very serious and heinous crime which took place on 05.06.2011. Initially FIR was lodged against 6 to 7 unknown persons on 05.06.2011. There has been several orders passed by the Court in the recent past and considering the gravity of the crime accused p
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy justice under Article 21, necessitating bail despite the gravity of the charges.
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 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 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 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.
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 a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial violates this right.
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.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the right to a speedy trial, necessitating bail when delays are not caused by the accused.
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
