Prolonged trial delay and delayed framing of charges justified bail, subject to passport deposit and travel restrictions.

Prolonged pendency of trial and delay of about 15 months in framing charges justified grant of bail, especially where several co-accused were already on bail or under protective orders. The Court treated the delay in framing charges as a matter for the trial court to manage and left disputes over supply of un-relied documents to be addressed there. Bail was granted subject to conditions imposed by the trial court, including deposit of the passport, prior permission before foreign travel, and furnishing one surety from a blood relation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to bail in the circumstances of prolonged pendency of the trial, and what conditions were to govern the grant of bail.

Analysis: The order records that charge had not been framed for about 15 months from filing of the charge sheet and that a large number of accused were already on bail or under protective orders. The Court treated the delay in framing of charges as a matter for the trial court to control, and noted the dispute concerning supply of un-relied documents. On the factual matrix, it found that the appellant was entitled to bail, subject to conditions to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Conclusion: The appellant was granted bail, with directions to deposit the passport, obtain prior permission from the trial court before travelling abroad, and furnish one surety from a blood relation.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed to the extent of grant of bail and stood disposed of with conditions.

Ratio Decidendi: Prolonged incarceration and delayed framing of charges may justify grant of bail, even while leaving procedural issues such as document supply to be addressed by the trial court.

---