Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR, JJ
Manoj Rai @ Rajesh Rai S/o Sahdeo Rai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I.A. No.12728 of 2024
1. The instant interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 21(5) of the N.I.A. Act for condoning the delay of 41 days in preferring the instant appeal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Considering the reason assigned in the interlocutory application and taking into consideration the purport of Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act , 2008, the delay of 41 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned.
4. Accordingly, I.A. No.12728 of 2024 stands allowed.
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1559 of 2024
1. The instant appeal preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act , is directed against the order dated 13.08.2024 passed in MCA No.1473 of 2024, in connection with S.T. Case No.604 of 2023, arising out of Pirtand P.S. Case No.12 of 2010, registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the IPC, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of the U.A.(P) Act, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case.
3. It has fur
The court emphasized the principle of treating similarly situated individuals consistently in bail matters, allowing bail based on co-accused's previous release and the appellant's prolonged custody.
The principle of parity in bail applies when co-accused face identical charges, warranting similar treatment unless distinct circumstances exist.
Prolonged custody and lack of progress in trial justify granting bail, especially when co-accused with similar circumstances have been released.
Offence of Attempt to Murder - Bail Application - Power under Section 439 cannot be exercised when there is specific provision in the statute for filing appeal before High Court against an order of g....
Prolonged judicial custody without trial progress and lack of incriminating evidence can justify granting bail, emphasizing the right to timely justice under Article 21.
The court held that the appellant, having no criminal history and being in custody since July 2024, is entitled to bail, especially as the victims were recovered from a co-accused who was granted bai....
The court emphasized the principle of parity in bail decisions, allowing bail for the appellant due to prolonged custody and similarity to co-accused cases.
The court upheld that a prima facie case against the accused under UAPA provisions justifies denial of bail, despite claims of trial delays.
A single Bench lacks jurisdiction to extend bail orders to cases under the National Investigation Agency Act, requiring appeals to be heard by a two-judge bench.
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
