Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Netram – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the bail application and background. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding the applicant's lengthy incarceration. (Para 6 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's emphasis on trial delays affecting justice. (Para 7 , 14) |
| 4. delay in trial does not automatically warrant bail. (Para 12 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. conclusion on the rejection of bail application. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
2. This is the second application for grant of bail filed on behalf of the applicant - Netram with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.324 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3 /4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Barkheda, District Pilibhit.
3. The first bail application of the accused-applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 6.6.2023 on merits.
4. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that within three years of marriage, the daughter of the informant was subjected to dowry death by her in-laws including the present accused applicant, who is the husband of the deceased. It is also alleged in the F.I.R. that a demand of additional dowry w
Delayed trial does not guarantee bail, especially in grave offenses; the seriousness of accusations necessitates cautious judicial scrutiny and timely prosecution.
The right to speedy trial under Article 21 can justify bail due to inordinate delays, despite the serious nature of criminal charges.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and prolonged incarceration without trial is impermissible.
The court emphasized the need to balance the individual's right to personal freedom with the right of police investigation, and considered the delay in trial, lack of prima facie evidence, and absenc....
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 mandates release under Section 436-A of the CrPC after serving half of the maximum imprisonment period, regardless of the nature of the offence.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution mandates that an undertrial cannot be detained beyond half of the maximum sentence without trial, warranting bail under Section 436-A ....
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution mandates that an undertrial cannot be detained beyond one-half of the maximum imprisonment period without trial, leading to bail being....
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
