Detailed Appreciation Of Evidence Impermissible At Bail Stage: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has reiterated that at the stage of considering a bail application, a detailed appreciation of the evidence is impermissible.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta set aside the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad Bench order granting bail to the accused in a murder case involving offences under the SC/ST Act, holding that the High Court had erred in ascertaining the authenticity of medical evidence at the pre-trial stage.

“observation made by the High Court regarding the time gap between the date of the incident and the date of death of the deceased…is concerned, the said aspect would have to be gone into by the trial Court at the time of appreciating the medical evidence.”, the Court observed, while setting aside the impugned bail order.

Observing that “the order granting bail can be interfered with by the superior Court considering the nature and gravity of the offences; if the order granting bail ignores the relevant material available on record or that the same is based on extraneous considerations”, the bench held that the High Court erred in granting a bail to the accused persons, despite no justifiable grounds existed to grant bail to the accused persons.

“Once the High Court itself noted the multiple injuries on the body of the deceased with injury No. 8 causing deep rooted cerebral damage by blunt trauma, there was absolutely no justifiable reason to grant bail to the accused respondents.”, the court observed.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order granting bail was set aside, with a direction to the accused persons to surrender within four weeks, and the trial court to complete the trial within one year.

Cause Title: SHOBHA NAMDEV SONAVANE VERSUS SAMADHAN BAJIRAO SONVANE AND OTHERS

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 188

Click here to download judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) :Ms. Priyanka Deshpande, Adv. Dr. R. R. Deshpande, AOR Mr. Bhagwant Deshpande, Adv. Ms. Vidya B.kothule, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Ms. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Vatsalya Vigya, AOR Mr. Varad Kilor, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.