| |
CDJ 2026 SC 104
|
| Court : Supreme Court of India |
| Case No : Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 6082 of 2025) |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN |
| Parties : Sumit Versus State of Haryana & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: ----- For the Respondents: ----- |
| Date of Judgment : 15-01-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
| Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 148, 149, 302, 323, 324, 379-B, 452 and 506 - |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Appeal
- Writ Petition
- Transfer
- Incarceration
- Trial
- Adjournments
3. Summary:
The appellant Sumit challenged the High Court’s denial of bail for offences under multiple sections of the IPC. He has been in custody since 08‑10‑2023 and the trial is at an early stage with only one witness examined. A separate writ petition seeks transfer of the case from Faridabad to Delhi, which remains pending. The Court observed that continued imprisonment is unwarranted at this juncture. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court’s order. Sumit was directed to be released on bail with conditions to be fixed by the Special Court and to cooperate with the trial without causing unnecessary adjournments. No merits of the case were addressed.
4. Conclusion:
Appeal Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant, Sumit, is aggrieved by the judgment and final order dated 25.02.2025 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, denying him bail in connection with First Information Report (FIR) No. 176 dated 01.10.2023 registered with Police Station - Tigaon, Faridabad, Hayrana, for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 302, 323, 324, 379-B, 452 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860[for short 'IPC'] (Sections 325, 120-B and 201 of the IPC added later on).
3. The appellant, Sumit, has been in prison since 08.10.2023. The trial has already commenced and we are informed that 1 out of the 46 listed witnesses has been examined. There is, therefore, no possibility of the trial concluding any time in the near future.
4. Further, Writ Petition No. 520/2024 has been filed by the complainant, Rajesh Singh, before this Court seeking transfer of the case from Faridabad, Haryana, to Delhi. This aspect of the matter is yet to be considered.
5. In the meanwhile, we are of the opinion that the continued incarceration of the appellant, Sumit, is not warranted at this stage.
6. The appeal is accordingly allowed, setting aside the impugned judgment/order passed by the High Court.
7. The appellant, Sumit, is directed to be released on bail in connection with the aforestated FIR, on such appropriate terms and conditions as may be fixed by the Special Court.
8. The appellant shall cooperate during the course of the trial and shall not take unnecessary adjournments.
9. We clarify that we have not made any observations/comments on the merits of the case and any observation made in this order is meant only for the limited purpose of grant of bail.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
|
| |
