FARJAND ALI
Jagtar Singh S/o Chhindra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
| S. No. | Particulars of the Case |
|
| 1. | FIR Number | 629/2022 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Sardar Shahar |
| 3. | District | Churu |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | Section 8/25 of the NDPS Act |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order | 12.07.2024 |
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.
4. I have considered the submiss
A Convict Prisoner v. State reported in 1993 CrLJ 3242
Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak reported in (1992) 1 SCC 225
Gudikanti Narasimhulu & Ors. v. Public Prosecutor
Gurbaksh Singh Sibba v. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565
Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secy.
Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.2787/2024)
Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar reported in (1981) 3 SCC 671
Mohd Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2023 INSC 311
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51
Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb reported in (2021) 3 SCC 713]
V. Senthil Balaji Vs. The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement [Criminal Appeal No.4011/2024]
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial violates the accused's rights, warranting bail.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial violates Article 21 of the Constitution.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial infringes upon this right, warranting bail.
An accused's right to a speedy trial is paramount, and prolonged incarceration without trial infringes upon fundamental rights.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental; prolonged detention without trial violates the accused's rights, warranting bail.
Indefinite incarceration without trial violates the right to a speedy trial and the presumption of innocence, necessitating bail under Section 439 CrPC.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial violates this right.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and indefinite detention without trial violates constitutional guarantees, warranting bail.
Grant of bail on ground of undue delay in trial, cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of NDPS Act, given imperative of Section 436A of Cr.P.C., which is applicable to offences under NDPS Act t....
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial violates constitutional guarantees, necessitating bail even in serious cases.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.