This High Court allowed the State to oppose bail in a fourth application regarding sexual offences. The court held that previous bail applications were rejected and circumstances remained unchanged, distinguishing a specific Supreme Court observation as inapplicable.
The bail application is rejected and the applicant remains in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 325 of 2019
Versus
---- Non-applicant
For Applicant : Shri Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board
04.02.2019
2
where the accused are in custody, be normally concluded within 6 months and sessions trials where accused are in custody be normally concluded within two years. As a supplement to Section 436-A, but consistent with the spirit thereof, if an undertrial has completed period of custody in excess of the sentence likely to be awarded if conviction is recorded such undertrial must be released on personal bond. Such an assessment must be made by the trial Courts concerned from time to time.
Sd/-
(Sharad Kumar Gupta) JUDGE
kishore
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to an applicant whose multiple bail applications have been previously rejected in similar circumstances.
Whether the Supreme Court observation in Hussain v. Union of India regarding time-bound trials applies to the present bail application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hussain and another v. Union of IndiaDistinguished¶19
Hussain and another -v- Union of India [(2017) 5 SCC 702] · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ravindra @ Ravendra Kumar
Sharad Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
