Back
VIKAS BAHL
Lakhwinder Singh alias Happy – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for regular bail under ndps act. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding custody and need for bail. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. supreme court precedents on bail considerations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. conditions under which bail is granted. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. ordering of bail and specified conditions. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
This is the third petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.68 dated 20.06.2021, under Section 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Sadar Moga, District Moga.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2021 (more than 2 years) and investigation is complete and challan has presented and there are 18 prosecution witnesses, none of whom have been examined and thus, trial is likely to take time and the petitioner is not involved in any other case. It is further submitted that the first bail application of the petitioner was withdrawn on 08.09.2022 at that stage and the second bail application of the petitioner was withdrawn at that stage on 27.02.2023 and thereafter, sufficient
Grant of regular bail based on the length of custody, completion of investigation, and the likelihood of trial conclusion, in consideration of the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Consti....
The main legal point established is that the length of custody and the expected duration of the trial can be significant factors in granting regular bail under the NDPS Act, while also considering th....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of custody period, completion of investigation, and the likelihood of trial conclusion, along with the application of the righ....
Prolonged custody without trial, combined with completed investigation, can justify granting bail under Article 21, even with serious charges under the NDPS Act.
Prolonged custody and delayed trial violate the constitutional right to a speedy trial, allowing for a second bail application under the NDPS Act.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is paramount, and prolonged custody without trial can warrant the granting of bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution can override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the ND....
Prolonged incarceration and delays in trial can override the statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act, ensuring compliance with the right to a speedy trial.
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
