Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK SIBAL, LAPITA BANERJI
Jograj Singh Alias Jog – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Sibal, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the order dated October 20, 2023, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, exercising the powers of a Special Court (for short - the Special Court), dismissing the appellant's application for the grant of regular bail in FIR No.142 dated 07.09.2022 registered under Sections 389 IPC, 25(6) and 25(7)(i) of the Arms Act, 1959, Sections 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short - the NDPS Act), subsequently added offence under Sections 120-B IPC, Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 18-B, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short - the UAPA), further Section 389-IPC, Sections 21, 29, 61, 85 of NDPS Act were deleted and Section 387 IPC added later on, at police Station Sirhali (for short - the FIR in question).
THE FACTS
2. A secret information was received by the police that Lakhbir Singh @ Landa son of Naranjan Singh and Harminder Singh @ Harinder Singh @ Rinda son of Charan Singh, who are gangsters, were operating their network from abroad to get smuggled heroin, arms, ammunitions, explosives and hand gre
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.
Bail – Section 436-A of Cr.P.C. does not exclude offences under NDPS Act – Deprivation of personal liberty without ensuring speedy trial is not consistent with 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....
Long custody without trial can justify bail under UAPA, emphasizing the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Prolonged custody without trial can violate the right to speedy trial, justifying bail under UAPA despite serious allegations.
Prolonged detention without trial can violate the right to personal liberty, warranting bail even under stringent laws like UAPA and NDPS Act when evidence is insufficient.
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
