Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH
Kartar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. murder allegation from eyewitness security guard. (Para 1 , 7 , 9) |
| 2. bail sought for trial delay and innocence. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. speedy trial fundamental right under article 21. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. prolonged custody equals pre-trial punishment. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. bail granted on bond with conditions. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
Judgment :
Virender Singh, J.
Applicant Kartar Singh has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), with a prayer to release him on bail, during pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 112/2021, dated 30.05.2021, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FIR in question”), registered with Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, H.P., under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’).
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent and has falsely been implicated, in this case. According to the applicant, he has no concern, whatsoever, with the offences, for which he has been arrested, in this case.
3. The applicant has further pleaded that he is permanent resident of Village & Po
Undue delay in trial (five years custody, nine of 28 witnesses examined) violates Article 21 right to speedy trial, mandating bail to prevent pre-trial punishment when delay not accused's fault and t....
Prolonged pre-trial detention over 4 years with trial delay and co-accused on bail violates right to speedy trial under Article 21, obligating courts to grant bail unless risks justify continued cust....
Inordinate trial delay by prosecution violates Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases despite Section 37 rigours.
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....
Prolonged trial delay after two years, with minimal witness examination, constitutes change in circumstances for successive bail in NDPS case, violating Article 21 speedy trial right and warranting r....
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and significant delays in trials can justify granting bail.
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 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....
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and prolonged detention without trial is impermissible.
Prolonged incarceration of undertrials due to trial delays violates Article 21 right to speedy trial, entitling bail after over 2.5 years custody with minimal trial progress and no tampering risk.
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
