Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Chhotu Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. commercial quantity charas recovered from petitioner. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. false implication and trial delay claimed. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. state opposes citing offence gravity, section 37. (Para 6) |
| 4. trial delay exceeds two years, violates article 21. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. section 37 not absolute bar to bail. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. speedy trial is fundamental right under article 21. (Para 11 , 16 , 20) |
| 7. ndps bail granted due to trial delay precedents. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 8. state cites precedents against delay ground. (Para 15 , 17) |
| 9. distinguishes precedents; section 37 conditions satisfied. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 10. bail not punishment; balance competing factors. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 11. bail granted subject to stringent conditions. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
Bail petitioner namely, Chhotu Lal, who is behind the bars since 17.12.2023, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 137 of 2023, dated 17.12.2023, under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, registered at police Station, Banjar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Respondent-State has filed status repo
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 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 right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial violates this right, warranting bail even in serious offenses.
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.
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 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, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution, supersedes other concerns, justifying the granting of bail despite serious charges and prolonged detention.
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.
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
