Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Alamgir – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail petition filed under ndps act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. late trial due to prosecution delay. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments against bail based on severity. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court observations on trial delays. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. right to speedy trial emphasized. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. references to precedent on bail and trial delay. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. contrasting arguments regarding bail eligibility. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 8. judicial emphasis on constraints of justice. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 9. court's position on rights of accused. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 10. factors for consideration while granting bail. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 11. order for bail granted. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Bail petitioner, namely Alamgir, who is behind the bars since 23.12.2024, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.65 of 2024, dated 23.12.2024, under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, registered at Women Police Station Chamba, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Respondent/State has filed status report and SI Nikhil Kumar, WPS Chamba, has come present along with record. Record perused and returned.
3. Close scrutiny of status re
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and delays in trial can justify bail, even in serious offenses involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
The right to a speedy trial is a constitutional guarantee, and prolonged detention without trial constitutes a violation of Article 21, warranting bail even in cases involving commercial quantities o....
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right; bail may be granted in narcotics cases if incarceration time exceeds reasonable limits without trial completion.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial violates this right, warranting bail even in serious offenses.
An accused's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 mandates that excessive delays in trial should not negate the possibility of bail under serious charges.
Non-disclosure of arrest grounds violates Article 22(1), vitiating arrest and warranting bail; prolonged two-year pre-trial detention due to trial delays in NDPS commercial quantity case violates Art....
The right to a speedy trial, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution, supersedes other concerns, justifying the granting of bail despite serious charges and prolonged detention.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, prolonged incarceration over two years due to inordinate trial delay violates Article 21 speedy trial right; bail grantable despite Section 37 if guilt unproven and....
The denial of bail based solely on the nature of the crime violates the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, especially in cases with prolonged detention awaiting trial.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is fundamental; prolonged detention without trial justifies bail, regardless of the seriousness of the charges.
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
