Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Ajoy Basumatary @ Ajoy @ B. Buhum @ Birkhang Basumatary, Son of Bolendra Basumatary – Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency, Represented By The Standing Counsel – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manish Choudhury, J.
A. The Assail :-
1. The instant criminal appeal, preferred under sub-section [4] of Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency [NIA] Act, 2008, is directed against an Order dated 20.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, NIA, Assam at Guwahati in Misc. [NIA] Case no. 27 of 2024, which arose out of Special NIA Case no. 2 of 2015.
2. By the Order dated 20.03.2024, the learned Special Judge, NIA, Assam at Guwahati rejected a bail application, registered and numbered as Misc. [NIA] Case no. 27/2024, preferred by 8 [eight] nos. of charge-sheeted accused persons, namely, [i] Ajoy Basumatary @ Ajoy @ B. Buhum @ Birkhang Basumatary [A-1]; [ii] Dilip Basumatary @ B. Birbaisha @ Birbhai @ Birbhal @ Lambu [A-2]; [iii] Nitul Daimary @ D. Naihab @ Naihab [A-4]; [iv] Ustad Basumatary @ Dhaneswar Basumatary @ Dapung [A-5]; [v] Pohor Narzary @ Jaan Narzary [A-6]; [vi] Ananta Swargiary @ Agar [A-7]; [vii] Gojen Narzary @ Babul Narzary @ Kantiswar [A-8]; and [viii] Julius Basumatary @ Jujai [A-9], seeking bail in connection Special NIA Case no. 2/2015.
B. The case of the prosecution :-
3. On 25.12.2014, one First I
The court upheld the denial of bail for certain accused under the UA[P] Act, emphasizing the prima facie truth of serious charges and the right to a speedy trial, balancing individual liberty against....
Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record - Bail granted - Clause (b) of section 21(4) of MCOC Act it becomes evident that it contains an interdict against grant of bail unless Court sa....
Bail under UAPA is an exception; serious charges and prima facie evidence against the accused justify denial of bail.
(1) Statutory restriction like Section 43-D(5) of UAPA per se does not operate as an impediment on powers of Constitutional Court to grant bail, if a case of infringement of constitutional guarantee ....
The judgment establishes that prolonged pre-trial detention can infringe on the constitutional right to a speedy trial, justifying bail even under stringent laws.
Bail – Section 436-A of Cr.P.C. does not exclude offences under NDPS Act – Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial is not consistent with Article 21.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the right to life and liberty; bail may be granted even for serious charges if trial delay is substantial.
Bail under the U.A.P. Act requires prima facie assessment of allegations; long custody or parity with co-accused do not automatically justify release.
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
