Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Ashish Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
1. By way of instant petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner Ashish Kumar, who is behind bars for more than one year and nine months, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.99 of 2024, dated 28.06.2024, registered at Police Station Paonta Sahib, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, under Sections 20, 25, 29, 61 and 85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
2. Respondent/State has filed status report and ASI Dalip Kumar, IO, PS Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., has come present along with record. Record perused and returned.
3. Close security of record/status report reveals that on 22.04.2023, Police after having received secret information, apprehended vehicle bearing registration No.HP-77-9555 near Guru Nank Service and Washing Centre, Paonta Sahib and allegedly recovered 2.4 KGs of charas from the bag kept in afore vehicle. Since occupants of the vehicle namely Vipan Basu, Manjit Singh and present bail petitioner were unable to render plausible explanation qua possession of aforesaid quantity of contraband, Police after completion of necessary codal formaliti
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.
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 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 under Article 21, and delays in trial can justify bail, even in serious offenses involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
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 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.
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 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.
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....
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
