Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Y.G.KHOBRAGADE
Mangesh, s/o. Chandrakant Ransing – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through Investigating Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused charged with murdering sc wife by burning. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. prolonged detention violates article 21 speedy trial right. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. strong evidence and tampering risks justify bail denial. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. trial severely delayed with minimal witness examination. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. precedents favor bail for long pre-trial incarceration. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. bail denied; precedents inapplicable as trial progressing. (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.
1. By the present Appeal under section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellant/original accused takes exception to the order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, Ahmednagar in Special Case No. 259 of 2019, thereby rejected Exh.32 an application for bail under section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 395 of 2019 registered with Parner Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 203 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe
Prolonged pre-trial detention over 6 years does not warrant bail in serious murder case under atrocity laws if trial has examined witnesses; instead, direct expeditious conclusion within 6 months.
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 can justify bail due to inordinate delays, despite the serious nature of criminal charges.
The right to a speedy trial is a constitutional guarantee under Article 21, and undue delays in trial proceedings can justify the granting of bail.
Inordinate trial delay by prosecution violates Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases despite Section 37 rigours.
Prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can justify the grant of bail, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Inordinate delay in POCSO trial constitutes material change for successive bail application, overriding offence gravity; speedy trial right under Article 21 mandates release from prolonged undertrial....
Prolonged incarceration of undertrials due to trial delays violates Article 21 right to speedy trial, entitling bail after over 2.5 years custody with minimal trial progress and no tampering risk.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and indefinite detention without trial violates constitutional guarantees, warranting bail.
The court ruled that allegations of caste-based abuse must occur in public view to invoke the bar on anticipatory bail under the Atrocities Act, which was not established in this case.
Inordinate trial delay due to prosecution's witness non-production constitutes change in circumstances for successive bail, violating Article 21 speedy trial right and entitling release despite offen....
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
