Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Vijay Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. murder charges from shooting officials; trial delayed 7 years. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. delay violates speedy trial; state cites heinous crime. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. bail parameters include offence gravity and antecedents. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. prosecution delays by failing to produce witnesses. (Para 10) |
| 5. speedy trial is article 21 fundamental right. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. delay entitles bail despite serious offence. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 7. bail granted with strict conditions imposed. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 51 of 2018, dated 01.05.2018, registered at Police Station, Dharampur, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 353, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
2. It has been asserted that, according to the prosecution, the petitioner had fired upon government officials while they were discharging their official duties. The police arrested the petitioner and investigated the matter. They filed the main charge sheet before the Cour
Inordinate trial delay due to prosecution's witness production failure entitles accused to bail despite serious offences, as speedy trial right under Article 21 overrides gravity where detention prol....
Successive bail in serious offences granted on material change like trial delay and co-accused releases, upholding speedy trial right under Article 21 despite prior rejection.
Inordinate trial delay by prosecution violates Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases despite Section 37 rigours.
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....
In NDPS cases with intermediate contraband quantity, over one-year incarceration and trial delay violate Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail despite antecedents as State cannot oppose on cr....
Prolonged incarceration and trial delay in NDPS case with intermediate quantity constitute change in circumstances for successive bail, enforcing speedy trial right under Article 21 despite prior rej....
Successive bail in NDPS intermediate quantity case granted due to Article 21 speedy trial violation from long incarceration and trial delay, despite prior rejection and antecedents.
Successive NDPS bail granted despite prior dismissal due to over one-year pre-trial detention violating speedy trial right under Article 21, intermediate quantity, and despite antecedents.
Prolonged trial delay in NDPS intermediate quantity case violates speedy trial right under Article 21, constituting change in circumstances for successive bail despite prior rejections and antecedent....
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
