Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, LAPITA BANERJI
Shammi @ Joga – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral)
1. The appellant has challenged the order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar whereby his bail application in FIR No.187 dated 16.08.2021, registered under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act, Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 [for short,' UAPA'], at Police Station Gharinda, has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is alleged that the appellant along with co-accused Amritpal Singh was indulged in anti-national activities, but no recovery has been effected from him besides mobile phone and Rs.510/-. The appellant is 26 years old and is not involved in any other criminal case.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant in support of his submissions, has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India versus K.A. Najeeb, (2021) 3 SCC 713 and Shoma Kanti Sen versus State of Maharashtra and another, 2024 SCC Online SC 498, wherein it has been held that long custody by itself would entitle the accused under UAPA to grant of bail by invoking Article 21 of the Constitution
Prolonged custody without trial can violate the right to speedy trial, justifying bail under UAPA despite serious allegations.
Long custody without trial can justify bail under UAPA, emphasizing the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Long custody can justify bail under UAPA, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial as per Article 21.
The court held that prolonged pre-trial detention without significant evidence warrants bail under Article 21, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial. Serious allegations alone do not justify denial....
Prolonged pre-trial detention can justify bail under Article 21, emphasizing individual liberty rights even amidst stringent statutory limits.
Prolonged pre-trial detention mandates consideration for bail under Article 21, emphasizing the need for sufficient evidence linking the accused to criminal conspiracy under the UAPA.
Prolonged detention without trial can violate the right to a speedy trial, qualifying an accused for bail under Article 21, despite serious charges linking them to anti-national activities.
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
