SC sets aside bail granted to murder accused for gathering evidence to prove innocence

The Supreme Court has set aside an Allahabad High Court's order granting bail to a murder accused, primarily on the ground that any further detention of the applicant would be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal processual jurisprudence.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta found the High Court's order of May 12, 2025 as erroneous and allowed an appeal filed by informant Irfan. On a second bail application filed by the accused Riyasuddin, the High Court said, he would be deprived of effective defence strategy and that any further incarceration would prevent him from gathering evidence and tendering the same before the Trial Court to establish his innocence.

An FIR was lodged against accused Riyasuddin in District Bulandshahar, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 304 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. It was alleged that the accused, along with his two sons-Sarfaraz and Umardin and one Afsar, committed the murder of the appellant's father-Idris and also caused injuries dangerous to life to his brother Imram. It was further alleged in the complaint that the accused had chased the complainant’s father inside a mosque and opened fire on him.

The apex court noted the High Court had relied upon a decision of another coordinate bench, in the case of Prabhat Gangwar vs. State of UP, which stated the court has to determine in the facts of the case whether the accused needs to be set at liberty to frame his defence and gather evidence to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence.

In Gangwar case, the High Court had also said, "Setting an accused at liberty at large on this ground cannot be applied mechanically in all cases. The issue has to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case while doing so. All relevant facts including the evidences in the record, the conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard.”

Justice Nath's bench pointed out the coordinate bench of the High Court clearly stated that in an application for grant of bail, the court is competent to set an accused on liberty in order to afford him an opportunity to frame his defence and gather evidence, to enable him to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence. However, the court cautioned that such liberty on the said ground cannot be applied mechanically and would require to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case. All relevant facts including the evidence on record, conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as the trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard for enlarging the accused on bail.

"The view expressed in Prabhat Gangwar may be applied in rare cases but that too would have to be considered in the light of the observations made therein," the supreme court clarified.

On facts of the present matter, the apex court found that the High Court failed to evaluate the facts and circumstances of the present case especially the conduct of the accused, and in a blanket manner proceeded to grant bail solely on the ground that further incarceration will deprive the accused from an effective defence strategy. "Apparently, no such basis has been set out by Respondent No.2 for seeking bail as to what kind of defence strategy and the evidence that was required to be collected or what were the special facts and circumstances of the case which required this kind of indulgence. We are, therefore, not satisfied with the impugned order and are accordingly inclined to set it aside," the bench said.

While setting aside the impugned bail order, the accused has been directed to surrender within four weeks and the Trial Court has been asked to conclude the trial within three months.

Case Title: Irfan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr

J Date: August 18, 2025

Bench: Justices Nath and Mehta