The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution necessitates bail when trial delays infringe upon this right.

JUDGMENT :

(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Bankapur, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Mr. Mali, learned APP appearing for the Respondent- State.

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are as follows :-

3. As per the prosecution case, the Applicant is cousin of deceased Bhola alias Walmik Sahebrao Thakur (Pawar). Said Walmik under the influence of liquor used to assault his wife Pooja as well as his parents. It is the prosecution case that when the incident in question took place on 16^th May 2023, the Applicant and co-Accused-Ishwar Devram Thakur had met the deceased Walmik for the purpose of convincing him to behave properly and not to consume liquor. At that time, the incident took place and the Applicant and co-accused assaulted the deceased with an iron hammer on his head and legs.

4. It is the submission of Mr. Bankapur, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the Applicant is in custody since more than one year and seven months i.e. from the date of arrest on 22^nd May 2023. He submitted that there are only two accused persons. The Accused No.1-Ishwar Devram Thakur having same role has been released on bail by this Court by the order dated 14^th December 2024 passed in Bail Application No.5089 of 2024. He therefore, submits that the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the Applicant has no other antecedents.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Mali, learned APP for the Respondent-State strongly opposed the Bail Application. Mr. Mali, learned APP pointed out the statements of eye witnesses to the incident i.e. Rekha Ishwar Thakur (Page Nos. 90 to 92) and statement of Yashodabai Nivrutti Thakur (Page Nos. 93 to 95). He submitted that the material on record clearly shows the involvement of the Applicant in the offence in question and therefore, the Bail Application be rejected.

6. Perusal of the record shows that the incident in question took place on 16^th May 2023, FIR has been registered on 17^th May 2023 and the Applicant has been arrested on 22^nd May 2023. Although the chargesheet is filed on 14^th August 2023, till date there is no progress in the trial and even the charge is also not framed. As per the chargesheet, there are 30 witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution. Accordingly, the trial is unlikely to conclude any time soon and is likely to take a considerably long time.

7. Speedy trial is one of the facets of right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial is an essential ingredient of “reasonable, fair and just” procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the Accused.[Hussainara Khatoon (IV) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 98]. Therefore, the Applicant is entitled for bail. If the Applicant’s detention is continues, it will amount to an infringement of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of speedy trial.

8. There are no criminal antecedents against the present Applicant.

9. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.

10. Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing conditions.

11. In view thereof, the following order:-

ORDER 

(a) The Applicant – Pradip Nivrutti Thakur be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.190 of 2023 registered with the Nandgaon Police Station, District - Nashik on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(b) On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his