Accused In Jail For 9 Years As Undertrial Deserves Bail As Article 21 Right Violated : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently granted bail to an undertrial prisoner in jail for the past 9 years on the grounds that his Article 21 right has been violated.
A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan granted bail, reiterating that an undertrial can't be kept in jail for an indefinite period.
To briefly state, the petitioner was denied bail by the Allahabad High Court in connection with the offence of murder. He was facing offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner has been undertrial for more than 9 years and the trial is currently at the fag end. It was also submitted that the co-accused was granted bail by the Court on April 29.
While granting bail, the Court noted that the Allahabad High Court denied bail while misunderstanding the Supreme Court's judgment in X v State of Rajasthan(2024), in which Justice Pardiwala was a part of. The High Court understood that once the trial has commenced in cases such as order, it should be allowed to reach its conclusion and bail in such cases should not ordinarily be granted.
The Supreme Court had responded that the High Court failed to understand the true purport of the judgment and that it should have considered the right of speedy trial of the undertrial.
It may be noted that the Rajasthan judgment pertained to a rape case in which the accused was granted bail. While the Court had said that ordinarily, once the trial has commenced, bail should not be granted in serious offence, it has said that if there is undue delay in the trial for no fault of the accused, his right to a speedy trial must be protected.
Terming it a "gross" case of violation of Article 21, it had reiterated that, however grave the crime may be, if the accused is denied the right to speedy trial and is languishing in jail for years for no fault of his, he can't be kept in jail for an indefinite period of time in the bail order for the co-accused.
In the present matter, the Court deemed it fit to clarify that the dictum of the 2024 judgment should be understood as per the facts of each case. It said: "If an accused in jail past 9 years, as an under-trial prisoner, then he deserves to be released on bail because its a right as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution that could be said to be violated."
Case Details: VICKKI YADAV @ VIKAS YADAV v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH|Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 9430/2026
Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 545
Appearances: For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shwetank Sailakwal, AOR Mr. Mayank Suryan, Adv. Ms. Abhinanda Bhuyan, Adv. Mr. Alok Mishra, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Beenu Sharma,Adv. Mr. Venkat Narayan,Adv. Mr. Akash, Adv. Mr. Abijit Singh, Adv. Ms. Chanchal, Adv. Mr. Srajan Shankar Kulshrestha, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Dutt Shukla, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, AOR Mr. Danish Alvi, Adv.