After Nearly 8 Years In Custody, P&H HC Makes Bail Absolute For Murder Accused Who Did Not Misuse Interim Release

The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from the 2018 murder of Parmod Gupta, registered under Sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act and Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (corresponding to Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).

The petitioner had been in custody since 10 August 2018.

The trial remained pending, with several prosecution witnesses still to be examined; co-accused Ravi had died during trial.

On 26 August 2026, the Court granted the petitioner interim bail and directed an inquiry into the causes of the trial’s prolonged pendency.

At the final hearing, the petitioner submitted that he had not misused interim bail, and the State did not dispute this.

The petition was considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides for bail jurisdiction of the High Court or Court of Session.

The Court’s reasoning reflected the principle that prolonged pre-trial detention and delay in concluding a trial are relevant to the exercise of bail discretion; it also treated compliance with interim bail and the absence of any allegation of misuse as relevant circumstances.

The Court made no determination on the merits of the charges and cited no precedent in its final order.

The Court had earlier noted the trial’s substantial duration and remaining prosecution evidence, and had granted interim bail while directing an inquiry into the reasons for delay.

At the final hearing, the petitioner’s submission that he had not misused that concession was uncontroverted by the State.

In light of that undisputed fact, the Court made the interim order absolute, while directing that the petitioner not threaten or influence prosecution witnesses.

It expressly left the merits for independent determination by the trial court.

The petitioner was directed not to threaten or influence any prosecution witness, and the trial court was directed to decide the case independently and expeditiously.

The matter was ordered to be listed on 15 December 2026 solely to await compliance with the earlier direction for a fact-finding inquiry into the trial delay.