Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA
Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the legality of bail petition considering prolonged detention. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments for and against admitting the bail. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. observations and statutory implications of ndps in granting bail. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. reasons and principles supporting bail due to personal liberty infringement. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. conditions and guidelines set while granting bail. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Bail petitioner [Om Prakash], who is in custody since 05.05.2023 has come up before this Court, seeking regular bail, under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sahinta, hereinafter (hereinafter referred to as BNSS ), originating from the FIR No.57 of 2023 dated 05.05.2023, registered at Police Station Hatli, District Mandi, [H.P.], underSections 15, 18 and 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (referred to as the NDPS Act).
FACTUAL MATRIX IN BAIL PETITION:
2. Case as set up by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary and Mr. Panku Chaudhary, Learned Counsel (s) is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and entire story has been fabricated and concocted. It is averred that bail petitioner is in detention, for the last more than one year a
Prolonged detention without trial undermines personal liberty; bail is favored, especially when evidence against the accused is weak and trial delays are significant.
Bail is granted when no prima facie case exists against the accused, emphasizing the right to personal liberty under Article 21, especially during prolonged incarceration and delay in trial.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to personal liberty under Article 21, necessitating the grant of bail even under stringent provisions like the NDPS Act if no reasonable groun....
Bail can be granted even under stringent laws like the NDPS Act when prolonged incarceration occurs without trial, emphasizing personal liberty and the presumption of innocence.
Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, requiring bail to be granted in cases of no substantive evidence against the accused and ex....
The court reinforced that bail serves to protect an individual's personal liberty, particularly when prolonged detention without trial raises constitutional concerns under Article 21, emphasizing the....
Prolonged pre-trial detention without a clear and prima facie case warrants bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates personal liberty; bail is granted when no reasonable grounds exist for guilt.
Under prolonged detention circumstances, bail should be granted if no reasonable grounds exist to believe in the guilt of the accused, respecting Article 21 rights.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
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
