SC Faults HC Bail for Lack of 'Comprehensive Reasons' After Two Cancellations

The Supreme Court recently, for the third time, overturned a bail order of the Allahabad High Court in favour of murder accused Waseem, reiterating that orders of the apex court must be followed “in letter and in spirit” by all other courts.

A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S.V.N. Bhatti, in a reportable judgment dated July 29, 2025, allowed an appeal filed by complainant Ajwar against the high court’s June 3, 2025, decision granting bail. Court directed that Waseem remain in custody until the trial’s conclusion, granting him liberty to approach the Supreme Court for bail only if the trial is not concluded expeditiously for reasons not attributable to him.

Court noted that Waseem’s bail plea before the high court was premised on six “new circumstances,” including prolonged custody, examination of prosecution witnesses, alleged delay caused by the informant’s applications, and parity with co-accused who were granted bail. However, it found that the high court merely reproduced these grounds without analysing whether they met the test for “new circumstances” under its earlier order dated May 17, 2024, which had left only a narrow scope for reconsideration.

The bench took particular exception to the high court’s observations of “one-sided investigation by police” and “ignoring the case of accused side,” terming them “thoroughly unwarranted” and unrelated to the bail question. It also rejected reliance on “5–6 times overcrowding in jails” as a ground to grant bail in a case involving heinous offences.

The judgment stressed that while bail orders need not be lengthy, in this case, where the apex court had twice set aside bail, it was “incumbent upon the high court to provide comprehensive reasoning” consistent with earlier directions.

Court referred to precedents such as Niranjan Singh v Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote (1980) 2 SCC 559, Vilas Pandurang Pawar v State of Maharashtra (2012) 8 SCC 795, Atulbhai Vithalbhai Bhanderi v State of Gujarat (2023) 17 SCC 521, and Manoj Kumar Khokhar v State of Rajasthan (2022) 3 SCC 501, and reiterated its earlier observation in Ajwar v Niyaj Ahmad, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1403, that “an over-burdened docket is no justification for formulaic justice".

Ordering Waseem to surrender within three weeks, the top court directed the trial court to prioritise the case and conclude it expeditiously. On the accused’s grievance that a counter-case was not being diligently pursued, it said the aggrieved party may seek remedies before the appropriate forum.

The case arose from an FIR under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 302, 307, 504 and 34 of the IPC. Waseem was first granted bail by the high court on August 22, 2022, which was set aside by the Supreme Court on October 14, 2022.

On December 7, 2022, the high court again granted bail, which was overturned on May 17, 2024 (Ajwar v Waseem, (2024) 10 SCC 768) after a detailed examination of the merits.

That order left a limited window open for reconsideration only if new circumstances emerged.

The trial court rejected Waseem’s subsequent bail plea on January 20, 2025, leading him to again approach the high court, resulting in the impugned order.

Case Title: Ajwar v Waseem and Another

Date of Judgment: July 29, 2025

Bench: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti