Back
DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Second Bail Shiv Kumar @ Kala – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.661/2014, Police Station Kotwali, District Pali, registered for the offence under Sections 341, 302, 307, 394, 420, 465, 471/120-B IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
3. Arguing on this second bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the first bail application of the accused- petitioner was dismissed on 16.06.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.01.2015 and therefore he is facing incarceration for more than 7 years and out of 63 witnesses, only 4 witnesses have been examined so far. He further submits that there is no possibility of the completion of the trial proceedings of the present case in near future. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for years together. Learned counsel submits that in the case of Union of India V/s K. A.
Bail – Fifth bail application filed solely on the ground of custody period of accused and keeping in view fact that trial against him has not been completed till date, deserves to be accepted.
Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to ju....
The delay in trial and prolonged incarceration can warrant granting bail despite statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act.
Prolonged custody without trial can unjustly punish an accused, warranting bail under the presumption of innocence.
Prolonged incarceration and delays in trial can justify bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the right to a speedy trial under Article 21.
The court considered the prolonged incarceration and the unlikelihood of the trial being completed in the near future as grounds for granting bail.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without a speedy trial violates constitutional rights, justifying bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
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
