Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The record shows that the petitioner (‘accused’) has committed heinous offences while he was on bail in other cases; and he has been convicted in the offences committed while on bail. When there is a long list of serious criminal involvements, the apprehension that the accused suffers from recidivism cannot be dismissed as imaginary.”
“The right to life and personal liberty cannot be rendered nugatory by unwarranted delays in the judicial process, particularly where such delay(s) is neither attributable to the accused nor justified by the prosecution with cogent reasons. An individual cannot be kept behind bars for an inordinate period of time by taking refuge in the rigours of Section 37.”
The allegations against the accused are that he was allegedly involved in anti-national activities but only a mobile phone was recovered from him containing objectionable photographs of arms and ammunition. There was no other recovery either of firearms or any other incriminating material.
In Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali v. National Investigating Agency, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 11185, the accused under various provisions of IPC and UAPA was released on bail by the High Court, conducting a mini trial and determining admissibility of certain evidence which clearly exceeded the limited scope of a bail proceeding, hence, the Supreme Court in NIA v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, (2019) 5 SCC 1, cancelled the said grant of bail.
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., remarked that, “…achievement of universal equality before the law requires the tenets of personal liberty to
Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal, J., allowed the petition and granted compensation for infringement of right to a speedy trial under
High Court of Jammu and Kashmir: In the recent judgment passed by a Single Judge Bench comprising of M.K. Hanjura, J., addressed