Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.38 seconds)Section 323 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 504 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 308 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Paras Ram Vishnoi vs The Director, Central Bureau Of ... on 22 February, 2021
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, at the very outset, this Court anguish towards the poor progress of trial, the trial must have been concluded by now and the learned trial court is having powers to take coercive method to conclude the trial and also armed with the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., therefore, this Court is unable to comprehend as to how there is no good progress in the trial, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, as also, considering that applicant is in jail since 05.04.2018 and the trial has not yet been concluded and out of 18 witnesses only four witnesses have been examined as well as considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, Kamal Vs. State of Haryana, 2004 (13) SCC 526 and Takht Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2001 (10) SCC 463, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Union Of India vs K.A. Najeeb on 1 February, 2021
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, at the very outset, this Court anguish towards the poor progress of trial, the trial must have been concluded by now and the learned trial court is having powers to take coercive method to conclude the trial and also armed with the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., therefore, this Court is unable to comprehend as to how there is no good progress in the trial, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, as also, considering that applicant is in jail since 05.04.2018 and the trial has not yet been concluded and out of 18 witnesses only four witnesses have been examined as well as considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No.693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, Kamal Vs. State of Haryana, 2004 (13) SCC 526 and Takht Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2001 (10) SCC 463, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.