Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J
Mohammad Khalid Mukhtar Ahmed Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]
1. Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant, Ms. Yadav, learned APP for State and Mr. Rathod, learned Advocate for Intervenor.
2. This is an Application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 seeking Regular Bail in connection with C.R. No.312 of 2020 registered with Bhiwandi City Police Station for offences under Section 364-A , 384, 385 , 386 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 readwith Section 3 and 25 of the Arms Act . There are in all five Accused in the matter. Applicant before me is Accused No.1 and has been incarcerated since 25.09.2020 i.e. for 4 years 4 months and 14 days.
3. Briefly stated the aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the First Information Report (FIR) lodged by first informant Takweem @ Guttu Ajaz Khan. The first informant is engaged in construction business being run under the name Razi Constructions. In the year 2014, the first informant had undertaken redevelopment of one Rangadi Building at Bhiwandi, during which time present Applicant was the Corporator of Bhiwandi Nizampura Municipal Corporation. It is stated by the first informant that Applicant called him to his office and instruct
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.
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 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 principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception is reinforced, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
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.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21, warranting bail as the rule and refusal as the exception.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21, necessitating bail for the accused.
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 for under-trials with prolonged incarceration, highlighting the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.
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
