Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Shaitan Singh S/o Shri Uttam Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
ORDER :
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.
1. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.32/2019, registered at SOG, Special Police Station, District SOG/ATS, Jaipur for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC and Section 65 of the Information Technology Act. After completion of investigation, Police filed charge-sheet in the matter.
2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by the Magistrate. Learned Counsel submits that the petitioner is facing trial before the Magistrate’s Court, and even in the event of conviction, the maximum sentence that may be imposed would not exceed seven years. The petitioner has already undergone incarceration for approximately six years and four months, having been in judicial custody since 20.09.2019, while the trial remains pending. Counsel submits that in these circumstances, it is apparent that petitioner's fundamental right to speedy trial, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution
Prolonged incarceration without trial is unconstitutional and violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21; balance must be maintained between personal liberty and societal interest.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged incarceration without trial violates this right, warranting the grant of bail.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial is unjustifiable.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy justice under Article 21, necessitating bail despite the gravity of the charges.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial violates this right.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21, necessitating bail for the accused.
Prolonged pre-trial detention violates the right to a speedy trial, necessitating bail when delays are not caused by the accused.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21, warranting bail as the rule and refusal as the exception.
Prolonged pre-trial detention can justify bail under Article 21, emphasizing individual liberty rights even amidst stringent statutory limits.
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
