Back
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Saad Ahmed Siddiqui (in J.C.) – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction for the writ petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments for bail pending sentence. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's obligation for timely sentence. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. enquiry before sentencing. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 5. directions to expedite proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
1. The present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of writ/orders/directions particularly in the nature of mandamus and certiorari with the prayer that petitioners be released from judicial custody, in interest of justice, till the pronouncement of order on sentence in Sessions Case No. 272/2021, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, South-East, Saket Courts, Delhi.
2. The case against the present petitioners relates to one FIR bearing no. 97/2021, registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar for offences punishable under Sections 364A/394/397/411/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC").
3. Succinctly, the case of prosecution before the learned Trial Court was that
Accused in judicial custody post-conviction must be afforded a speedy trial and timely sentencing to enable the right to appeal and challenge their conviction.
The guidelines mandating victim compensation procedures caused undue delays, violating the accused's right to a speedy trial; roles of trial courts and the State Legal Services Authority must remain ....
Failure to serve grounds of arrest immediately renders the arrest illegal, entitling the accused to bail, emphasizing the importance of personal liberty and compliance with constitutional rights.
Speedy trial is of the essence of criminal justice and there can be no doubt that delay in trial by itself constitutes denial of justice.
No one can be kept languishing in custody for indefinite period in anticipation of completion of trial.
When age is in doubt, then question of taking victim away from lawful guardianship does not arise.
The consent of a minor is immaterial for kidnapping charges under IPC, ensuring protection from seduction or coercion.
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
