Rajasthan High Court Orders Tehsildar To Personally Pay ₹2 Lakh Compensation For 53-Day Illegal Detention Despite Suspension Of Sentence Law Does Not Countenance Resurrection Of Stale Claims Through Inventive Drafting: Karnataka High Court Rejects 20-Year-Old Partition Dispute CPC Provisions Cannot Be Used to Transfer Consumer Complaints Across States: NCDRC Invokes Section 62 to End Forum-Shifting Ordeal in Nirmal Spinning Mills Case FSSA Provisions Prevail Over PFA Act In Cases Of Overlapping Jurisdiction, Prosecution Under Old Act Impermissible: J&K High Court Motive Pales Into Significance When Direct Ocular Evidence Establishes Crime; Enmity Is A Double-Edged Sword: Allahabad High Court Plaintiff Cannot Succeed Merely On Weakness Of Defence; Initial Burden To Prove Claim Rests On Claimant: Madras High Court Witness Threats Noted By Higher Courts Disentitle Convict To Suspension Of Sentence: Gujarat High Court Family Court Orders Must Be Enforced Immediately, Pendency Of Applications No Excuse For Disobedience: Delhi High Court 'Fraud And Justice Never Dwell Together': Karnataka High Court Reverses Order To Grant Land Based On Fabricated Records Development Authority Competent To Sanction Land Use Conversion From Residential To Nursing Home If Permitted Under Master Plan & Zoning Regulations: Allahabad High Court Notification Changing Import Policy From 'Free' To 'Restricted' Operative Only From Exact Time Of Publication In E-Gazette: Delhi High Court On Name Of Protection of the Complainer Excluding Relevant Defence Evidence in Sexual Offences Trials May Breach Fair Trial Rights: UK Supreme Court Boundaries In Sale Deed Prevail Over Discrepancy In Property Description; Adverse Possession Begins From Date Of Hostile Notice: Punjab & Haryana HC Supreme Court of UK Upholds HMRC Decision: Professional Fees Incurred by Investment Holding Company Are Capital Expenditure Criminal Law Cannot Be Used To Silence Citizens Questioning Legality Of Police Action: Madras High Court Quashes Obstruction Case Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Centre To Treat Ashok Khemka As Empaneled For Future Assignments, Says Denying Relaxation Granted To Peers Is Discriminatory Section 34 Court Cannot Substitute Arbitrator’s Plausible View With Its Own; Not Bound By Technical Rules Of Evidence Act: Madras High Court Article 227 Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Reopen Decrees Finalized Four Decades Ago: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Challenge To 1985 Order Daughter Has No Right To Inherit Agricultural Land If Succession Opened Before 2005 HSA Amendment: Delhi High Court Rejects Plaint Indian Trust Act Inapplicable To Public Religious Endowments; Sale Of Charity Property Without HR&CE Commissioner's Permission Void: Madras High Court Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Collateral Warranties Under Construction Contracts FIR Quashed Against Newsclick: PMLA Proceedings Cannot Stand Alone Without A Predicate Offence, Rules Delhi High Court Assessee Claiming TDS Exemption On "Reimbursement" To Non-Residents Must Obtain Mandatory Tax Determination Under Section 195(2): Madras High Court

Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Prolonged NDPS Case, Emphasizes Right to Speedy Trial

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to Ranjeet Singh and Preetpal Singh, who were arrested in connection with an FIR under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The bench, presided over by Justice Kuldeep Mathur, ruled in favor of the petitioners due to their prolonged incarceration and the undue delay in the trial proceedings.

The Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to Ranjeet Singh and Preetpal Singh, both accused under the NDPS Act, after a prolonged pre-trial detention of over three years. The decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding fundamental rights under Article 21, particularly the right to a speedy trial.

The court noted that the petitioners have been in custody since November 27, 2020, and that the trial has seen significant delays. "The petitioners have been in custody for more than three years and six months, and only three out of thirteen prosecution witnesses have been examined so far," Justice Kuldeep Mathur observed. The court emphasized that such delays are not attributable to the petitioners, thereby violating their right to a speedy trial.

Justice Mathur referenced several Supreme Court judgments to support the decision, particularly focusing on the balance between statutory restrictions and constitutional rights. In *Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb* (2021), the Supreme Court highlighted that while statutory restrictions on bail are significant, they must be harmonized with the constitutional mandate for a speedy trial. The court also cited *Rabi Prakash vs. The State of Odisha* (2023), where prolonged incarceration was deemed sufficient to override statutory bail restrictions under the NDPS Act.

Justice Mathur stated, "An accused person cannot be kept in custody for an indefinite period till the trial is concluded. The presumption of innocence, a well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence, operates in favor of the petitioner."

The High Court’s order granting bail to Ranjeet Singh and Preetpal Singh highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring that delays in the judicial process do not infringe upon the fundamental rights of the accused. This decision reiterates the importance of a balanced approach between statutory provisions and constitutional rights, particularly in cases involving prolonged pre-trial detention.

The ruling is expected to impact future cases under the NDPS Act, where delays in trial proceedings are commonplace. It serves as a reminder to lower courts to expedite trials and protect the fundamental rights of the accused.

Date of Decision: May 27, 2024 

Ranjeet Singh vs. State of Rajasthan

 

Latest Legal News