Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Bachan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's detention context and case facts. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. prosecution argues against bail. (Para 4) |
| 3. court acknowledges delay in trial process. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. right to speedy trial upheld. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 17) |
| 5. judicial considerations for bail grant. (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 18) |
| 6. guidelines for determining bail. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. formal conclusion and order specifics. (Para 19 , 20) |
1.Bail petitioner namely Bachan Singh, who is behind bars since 25.10.2023, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.148 of 2023, dated 25.10.2023, under Sections 20 and 29 of ND & PS Act, registered at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P.
2. Pursuant to order dated 10.3.2026, respondent-State has filed the status report and ASI Puran Bhagat Singh, has come present with record. Record perused and returned.
3. Close scrutiny of record/status report made available to this Court reveals that on 25.10.2023 at 04:30 a.m., police party present near link road Gona Dhaneta received a secret information that charas is
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 pre-trial detention over two years due to inordinate trial delay violates Article 21 speedy trial right, warranting bail despite serious narcotics offence gravity.
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.
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.
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 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, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution, supersedes other concerns, justifying the granting of bail despite serious charges and prolonged detention.
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
