Supreme Court of India
P. Rama Chandra Rao v. State of Karnataka
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
2 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
What the Court ordered
We hold:- (I) The dictum in A.R. Antulay 's ca.se is correct and still holds the field. (2) The propositions emerging from Article 21 of the Constitution and expounding the right to speedy trial laid down as guidelines in A.R. Antulay's case, adequately take care of right to speedy trial.
Judgment, page 25
From the headnote
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 21-Right to speedy trial-Criminal Proceedings-Limitation bar provided by judgment of smaller Benches of Supreme Court-Held, such bar contrary to law laid down by larger Bench in Antulay's case-Limitation bars not good law, since the same would amount to impermissible legislation and contrary to law of precedent-To effectuate the right to speedy trial, powers under Sections 309, 311, 258 and 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution could· be exercised-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Sections 309, 311, 258 and 482.
Where later benches applied it
- 2024 High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- 2024 Nipun Malhotra v. Sony Pictures Films India Private Limited & Ors.
Of those, 1 followed · 1 referred to
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.