Back
SANJAY PRASAD, RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
Navinbhai Jayantibhai Patel @ Navin Patel son of Late Jayantibhai Jivrajbhai Patel @ Jayantibahi Jivraj Bhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Prasad, J.
The present criminal appeal has been preferred against the order dated 30.06.2023 passed by Sri Madhuresh Kumar Verma, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi in Special (NIA) Case No. 02 of 2018, corresponding to R.C. No. 02/2018/NIA/DLI dated 19.01.2018 registered under Section 212/213/414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13/17/40 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act arising out of Bero P.S. Case No. 67 of 2016 dated 10.11.2016, whereby the Learned Court below has rejected the bail application of appellant being Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 1571 of 2023.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.11.2016, on receiving secret information, the informant namely Mr. Bindeshwari Das, Officer In-charge of Bero P.S. registered an information received regarding the associates of Supremo of PLFI depositing ill-gotten money of crime proceed realized as extortion of levy at SBI, Bero, Ranchi. After having informed his superior authorities and having received their directives, he proceeded for its verification alongwith other police officials and reserve
Delay in trial does not justify bail in serious offenses when a prima facie case is established against the accused.
Prolonged detention without trial violates constitutional rights; bail may be granted considering the length of custody and co-accused's bail.
The right to bail cannot be denied solely based on serious allegations; prolonged detention without trial must be addressed as it infringes constitutional rights to a timely trial.
The court reiterated that under the UAPA, bail is the exception, emphasizing the prima facie strength of allegations against the accused involved in financing a terrorist organization.
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is imperative, and prolonged incarceration without the likelihood of a timely trial may warrant the grant of bail.
The court established that statutory bail restrictions under the UAPA must be balanced with constitutional rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial, and that prolonged detention without trial....
The judgment established that the continued detention of the appellant was in violation of his right to personal liberty, and he was entitled to bail considering the delay in trial and the gravity of....
Bail under UAPA is an exception; serious charges and prima facie evidence against the accused justify denial of bail.
The judgment underscores the principle that prolonged pre-trial detention without substantial evidence of involvement in terrorist activities can infringe upon constitutional rights, warranting the g....
The court established that under the UAPA, particularly Section 43D(5), the standard for denying bail is based on whether the accusations are prima facie true, which requires a careful examination of....
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
