In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court emphasized the constitutional right to a speedy trial, granting bail to Ranjit Mehto despite serious charges.
Delhi, May 5, 2026 — In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court has granted regular bail to Ranjit Mehto, who has been in custody for over five years, facing charges of abduction for ransom and murder. The ruling comes as the court underscored the fundamental right to a speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The case, which involves the alleged abduction and murder of Shyam Mohan Shukla, has been pending since February 2021. Despite the grave nature of the accusations, including sections 364A, 365, 302, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, the court found the prolonged pre-trial incarceration unjustifiable given the pace at which the trial is progressing.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, presiding over the case, noted that the prosecution's case rests largely on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct link between Mehto and the alleged crimes. The prosecution timeline raises doubts about the recovery of the dead body and weapon of offence, purportedly at Mehto's instance, as the recovery happened before his formal arrest.
The court highlighted several aspects of the prosecution's case, including the reliance on testimony from witnesses and forensic evidence, which will be scrutinized further during the trial. The judge observed that while the allegations are serious, the slow pace of the trial and the substantial time Mehto has already spent in custody necessitate intervention to safeguard his right to a speedy trial.
Justice Bhambhani imposed strict conditions on Mehto's bail to address concerns about witness safety. Mehto is required to furnish a personal bond, surrender his passport if he possesses one, and maintain constant communication with the authorities. He is also prohibited from contacting any witnesses or tampering with evidence.
The court acknowledged Mehto's criminal antecedents but determined that these should not automatically warrant continued incarceration, especially given the circumstances of the current case. This decision aligns with previous judgments emphasizing the preservation of constitutional rights over prolonged undertrial incarceration.
The ruling is a reminder of the judiciary's role in ensuring that justice is not only done but is seen to be done within a reasonable timeframe, reflecting the principle that justice delayed is justice denied.
Bottom line:-
Bail - Regular bail granted to an accused charged with serious offences, including abduction for ransom and murder, on the grounds of prolonged pre-trial incarceration, the case being based on circumstantial evidence, and in light of the constitutional guarantee of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Statutory provision(s): Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Sections 364A, 365, 302, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act
Ranjit Mehto v. State (NCT Of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2893341
