MUMBAI: Observing that bail can’t be denied to a murder accused where the charge has not yet been framed four years on Bombay high court recently directed that further incarceration of an accused is unnecessary in a 2019 murder case registered with Sakinaka Police station case. In another order, in an Ambernath murder case where one witness summons was issued by a trial court seven years after crime was registered and accused arrested, HC granted him bail.
Both orders, by Justice Bharati Dangre, invoked Supreme Court directives on liberty and principles of bail.In the Sakinaka case, Justice Dangre noted on Feb 6 that she had earlier in July 2022 rejected the bail plea filed earlier by the accused Imamuddin Khan on merits of the case following his surrender to police and bullet found in his revolver. Khan had then gone to the Supreme Court which granted him liberty to apply afresh for bail in case of change of circumstances or reasonable time. He thus on Jan 3, 2024 filed a second bail plea and through advocates Abhinav Chandrachud and Prem Pandey argued that despite being in jail for four years after his May 2019 arrest, the trial court is yet to frame charge, as a pre-trial step.
Chandrachud said the SC as well as the HC has reiterated the right to speedy trial as a facet of right to life.
Agreeing Justice Dangre said law is well settled on long incarceration of accused awaiting trial, whatsoever may be the accusation faced by him. In the murder case, investigation is over, chargesheet filed and his further incarceration is unnecessary, said the HC releasing him on Rs 25000 bail with several conditions and directed that any contact with witnesses would enable prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
In the Ambernath case, the HC said it was only on HC insistence that the trial court framed charge. Prashant Pandey and Dinesh Jadhwani advocates for the accused said in September 2022 the HC had directed the trial court to complete the trial in the rape and murder case within a year, but though 61 prosecution witnesses are cited, not a single one has yet been examined. A state prosecutor Mahalaxmi Ganpati vehemently opposed bail on merit. But Justice Dangre noted that the SC and HC has consistently held that “liberty of an individual is of utmost importance’’ and an enshrined fundamental right. “Awaiting trial, the Applicant cannot be incarcerated indefinitely, despite the fact that he is facing a charge of serious offence. Ultimately, he will face the consequences, on culmination of the trial,’’ said the HC order of Feb 22 and granted Walode bail on a PR bond of Rs 25000.
Both orders, by Justice Bharati Dangre, invoked Supreme Court directives on liberty and principles of bail.In the Sakinaka case, Justice Dangre noted on Feb 6 that she had earlier in July 2022 rejected the bail plea filed earlier by the accused Imamuddin Khan on merits of the case following his surrender to police and bullet found in his revolver. Khan had then gone to the Supreme Court which granted him liberty to apply afresh for bail in case of change of circumstances or reasonable time. He thus on Jan 3, 2024 filed a second bail plea and through advocates Abhinav Chandrachud and Prem Pandey argued that despite being in jail for four years after his May 2019 arrest, the trial court is yet to frame charge, as a pre-trial step.
Chandrachud said the SC as well as the HC has reiterated the right to speedy trial as a facet of right to life.
Agreeing Justice Dangre said law is well settled on long incarceration of accused awaiting trial, whatsoever may be the accusation faced by him. In the murder case, investigation is over, chargesheet filed and his further incarceration is unnecessary, said the HC releasing him on Rs 25000 bail with several conditions and directed that any contact with witnesses would enable prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
In the Ambernath case, the HC said it was only on HC insistence that the trial court framed charge. Prashant Pandey and Dinesh Jadhwani advocates for the accused said in September 2022 the HC had directed the trial court to complete the trial in the rape and murder case within a year, but though 61 prosecution witnesses are cited, not a single one has yet been examined. A state prosecutor Mahalaxmi Ganpati vehemently opposed bail on merit. But Justice Dangre noted that the SC and HC has consistently held that “liberty of an individual is of utmost importance’’ and an enshrined fundamental right. “Awaiting trial, the Applicant cannot be incarcerated indefinitely, despite the fact that he is facing a charge of serious offence. Ultimately, he will face the consequences, on culmination of the trial,’’ said the HC order of Feb 22 and granted Walode bail on a PR bond of Rs 25000.