Prolonged incarceration and slow trial progress warranted bail for an accused without antecedents.

Suraj sought bail in connection with FIR No. 0022 of 2025, registered at Police Station Pulbhatta, Udham Singh Nagar.

The FIR initially invoked Section 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS); after investigation, Suraj and two others were charge-sheeted under Sections 103, 238 and 3(5) of the BNS.

The applicant argued that there was no last-seen evidence or mobile-location evidence connecting him to the deceased, that he had no criminal antecedents, and that he had spent more than one year and six months in custody while only two of 19 prosecution witnesses had been examined. A juvenile co-accused had been granted bail.

The State opposed bail, relying on the recovery of the deceased’s body at the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused, but did not dispute the slow trial progress, absence of antecedents, or the juvenile co-accused’s release.

Whether the applicant should be released on bail in light of his period of custody, the progress of the trial, his lack of criminal antecedents, and the release of a juvenile co-accused.

The prosecution case involved alleged offences under Sections 103, 238 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, following an FIR initially lodged under Section 140(3) of the BNS.

The Court applied its discretion to determine whether bail was warranted, considering the circumstances placed before it, including the applicant’s period of incarceration, criminal antecedents, trial progress and the co-accused’s bail status.

The Court considered that Suraj had been incarcerated for more than one year and six months, had no criminal antecedents, and that the trial had made limited progress, with only two of 19 prosecution witnesses examined.

It also took account of the juvenile co-accused’s release on bail. Although the State relied on the recovery of the deceased’s body at the accused persons’ pointing out, the Court concluded that the circumstances warranted bail without expressing any view on the merits.

It directed that Suraj be released on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. As a condition of release, he must attend every trial-court proceeding and must not seek unnecessary adjournments.