9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Accused in custody for over 26 months without trial, bail application rejection, comparison with a similar case for bail grant. Analysis: The judgment addresses the issue of the petitioner, who is an accused in a case registered under Sections 420/406/409/120-B IPC, being in custody for more than 26 months without trial. The petitioner argued that his constitutional and legal rights were being violated by prolonged detention without trial. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the release of a similarly placed accused, V.K. Sharma, by the Supreme Court after 16 months in custody, despite serious allegations against him. Drawing parallels, the petitioner sought bail based on the principle of not being detained indefinitely without trial. The judgment refers to the Supreme Court's direction in the case of V.K. Sharma, where bail was granted after about 16 months in custody. Considering the petitioner's prolonged detention of over 26 months and the less severe allegations against him compared to V.K. Sharma, the court decided to grant bail. The conditions for bail included a personal bond, surrendering the passport, restrictions on leaving Delhi without court permission, non-interference with the case, and non-influence of prosecution witnesses. The court warned that bail could be canceled if misused. In conclusion, the court granted bail to the petitioner based on the principle of not being detained indefinitely without trial, citing a similar case where bail was granted after about 16 months in custody. The conditions for bail were outlined to ensure compliance and prevent misuse, with a warning of bail cancellation if necessary.
|
