Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

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