Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Bala Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. commercial quantity charas recovered from petitioner's vehicle. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on lack of knowledge, arrest reasons, and trial delay. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. no grounds disclosed in arrest memo violates article 22(1). (Para 5) |
| 4. evidence suggests possession despite delay in trial. (Para 6) |
| 5. section 37 ndps allows bail if no reoffending likelihood. (Para 7) |
| 6. prolonged detention violates speedy trial right under article 21. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 7. detention period not sole ground; consider quantity gravity. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. bail not punishment; ensure speedy trial regardless of crime seriousness. (Para 15) |
| 9. presumption of innocence; balance factors for bail grant. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 10. petitioner granted bail subject to conditions and sureties. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
Bail petitioner namely, Bala Ram, who is behind the bars since 23.10.2023 has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.338 of 2023, dated 22.10.2023, under Section 20, 29-61-85 of the NDPS Act and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Ac
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 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 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.
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 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.
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....
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
