Back
VIKAS BAHL
Kuldeep Singh @ Deep @ Deepu – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
This is the second petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.125 dated 22.05.2021 registered under Sections 22 (C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 at Police Station City Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 22.05.2021 (more than 2 years and 1 month), and the investigation is complete and challan has been presented and there are 16 witnesses out of which, only one has been examined till date and thus, the conclusion of trial is likely to take time. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and that the last bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn, at that stage, on 17.11.2022 and thereafter sufficient period has lapsed and thus entitling the petitioner to file present petition for bail. It is further submitted that further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of the right of the petitioner enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an order dated 12.01.2022 pass
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....
Prolonged custody without trial, combined with completed investigation, can justify granting bail under Article 21, even with serious charges under the NDPS Act.
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 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 and delayed trial violate the constitutional right to a speedy trial, allowing for a second bail application under the NDPS Act.
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
