Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

"Punjab-Haryana High Court Grants Bail in murder case , Emphasizes Right to a Speedy Trial as a Fundamental Right"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent landmark judgment, the Punjab-Haryana High Court granted bail to a petitioner accused of serious charges under Sections 302, 120-B of IPC, and Sections 27 of the Arms Act, stemming from a land dispute that resulted in a fatal shooting. The decision, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat on October 11, 2023, emphasizes the significance of the right to a speedy trial as a fundamental right enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

The petitioner had been in custody for over 3 years and 10 months, prompting the High Court to scrutinize the delay in concluding the trial. Citing the principle established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the judgment observed, "The right to a speedy trial is an integral and essential part of the fundamental right to life and liberty enshrined in Article 21."

The Court further noted that bail should not be punitive, but rather a means to ensure the accused's presence at the trial. It reiterated that pre-conviction detention should only be used when necessary to secure attendance at the trial or when there is credible evidence that the accused might tamper with witnesses.

In this case, the State of Punjab failed to provide evidence that the petitioner could influence witnesses. As a result, the Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to stringent conditions. These conditions include restrictions on influencing witnesses, mandatory attendance at court proceedings, surrendering any passport, providing an affidavit with current contact information, and reporting regularly to the police.

This judgment reaffirms the principle that the right to personal liberty is of paramount importance and should not be denied except in cases where it is essential to secure the trial process. It also serves as a reminder of the judiciary's commitment to upholding the fundamental rights of individuals, even in cases involving serious charges.

Legal experts and advocates have welcomed the decision, emphasizing that it underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual freedoms and ensuring that justice is not delayed unduly.

Date of Decision: 11th October 2023

Lakhvir Singh Khalsa   vs State of Punjab   

Latest Legal News