In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that right to speedy…

polity hard fill_blank

In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that right to speedy trial under Article 21 is not an absolute right and courts must balance the interests of the accused, victim, and society while determining ______.

bail conditions
reasonable period
compensation amount
appeal jurisdiction

Answer: reasonable period

P. Ramachandra Rao (2002): SC clarified Hussainara Khatoon: right to speedy trial under Article 21 is not absolute; no fixed time limit. Courts must balance: (a) Nature of offence, (b) Number of accused/witnesses, (c) Workload of court, (d) Prejudice to accused/victim. If delay unreasonable and attributable to prosecution, court may quash proceedings or award compensation. Pragmatic approach to procedural justice.

Topic Right to Speedy Justice - P. Ramachandra Rao Case

Exam Relevance Procedural due process nuance question for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

Quick Quiz Actions

Create a custom practice set

Weekly challenge coming soon

GK Question

In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that right to speedy trial under Article 21 is not an absolute right and courts must balance the interests of the accused, victim, and society while determining ______.