Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Hom Dei @Shallu – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Hom Dei @Shallu has sought her release, on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.57 of 2021, dated 22.02.2021, registered under Sections 302, 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’), with Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.
2. According to the applicant, she is resident of the address, as mentioned in the application and is having deep roots in the society.
3. As per the applicant, she has falsely been implicated, by the police, in the present case, as, there is no evidence, connecting her, with the crime, in question. The applicant is stated to be in judicial custody since 22.02.2021.
4. As per applicant, she had earlier tried her luck by moving similar bail application, before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. However, the same was rejected vide order dated 16.06.2022.
5. It is the case of the applicant that despite such a long period in the judicial custody, trial against her has not been concluded.
6.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and prolonged detention without trial is impermissible.
Prolonged pre-trial detention over 4 years with trial delay and co-accused on bail violates right to speedy trial under Article 21, obligating courts to grant bail unless risks justify continued cust....
Undue delay in trial (five years custody, nine of 28 witnesses examined) violates Article 21 right to speedy trial, mandating bail to prevent pre-trial punishment when delay not accused's fault and t....
Prolonged incarceration of undertrials due to trial delays violates Article 21 right to speedy trial, entitling bail after over 2.5 years custody with minimal trial progress and no tampering risk.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and significant delays in trials can justify granting bail.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to speedy justice under Article 21, necessitating bail despite the gravity of the charges.
Prolonged pre-trial detention infringes on the right to personal liberty under Article 21, necessitating bail when an accused has languished in custody beyond half the maximum sentence duration.
PMLA Section 45 twin conditions relaxable by constitutional courts for bail if prolonged custody (over 2 years) and unlikely timely trial violate Article 21, absent accused delay, with voluminous doc....
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 can justify bail due to inordinate delays, despite the serious nature of criminal charges.
Inordinate delay in POCSO trial constitutes material change for successive bail application, overriding offence gravity; speedy trial right under Article 21 mandates release from prolonged undertrial....
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
