Equivalent citations: 1978 AIR 527, 1978 SCR (2) 777, AIR 1978 SUPREME COURT 527, (1978) 1 SCC 579, 1978 SC CRI R 278, 1978 CRI APP R (SC) 90, 1978 ALLCRIR 243, 1978 MADLW (CRI) 85, 1978 SCC(CRI) 133, (1978) 2 SCJ 135, 1978 MADLJ(CRI) 465, (1978) 2 SCR 777
Babu Singh vs State of UP
FACTS
The current appeal is made aggrieved by the rejection of bail by the Supreme Court. all the petitioner are charged with the offence of murder who were acquitted by the sessions court however, it was reversed by the High Court. The present is the second appeal for bail before the Supreme Court. ISSUES
Are the petitioners fit to be set out on bail? LAWS INVOLVED
Speedy trial
Bail JUDGEMENT
The Supreme Court observed that after an unfortunately tragic sojourn of five years 'for an appeal in a murder case. Our justice, system, even in grave cases, suffers from slow motion syndrome which is lethal to "fair trial"., whatever the ultimate decision' Speedy justice is a component of social justice since the community, as a whole, is concerned in the criminal being condignly and finaly punished within a reasonable and the innocent being absolved from the incordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings.
The petitioners 1 to 5 have suffered sentence in some Measure, having. been imprisoned for about twenty months. While out on bail they were not found to be disrupting peache and the actual offence was an outcome of mere faction fight.
Of what avail would the acquittal be to a person who has already served out his term of imprisonment or at any rate a major part of it ? It is, therefore, absolutely essential that the practice which this Court has been following in the past must be reconsidered and so long as this Court is not in a position to hear the appeal of an accused within a reasonable period of time.
The petitooners are eligible to be enlarged on bail.
Comments