Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | Crl.A. No.-005400-005401 – 2025 |
| Diary Number | 27175/2023 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL |
| Bench |
|
| Precedent Value | Binding clarification of Sec. 436-A and Article 21 bail principles |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms that Sec. 436-A does not apply to death-penalty offences; sets aside HC bail orders |
| Type of Law | Criminal law (bail, CrPC, UAPA) |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that Section 436-A CrPC excludes offences carrying death as a possible punishment from its default-bail mandate. Article 21’s right to life and fair procedure must be balanced against public order and national security interests in heinous and anti-State crimes. Courts must record reasons when granting or denying bail, consider gravity and stage of trial, and ensure expeditious completion, especially in reverse-burden cases under UAPA. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
|
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts |
| Persuasive For | High Courts |
| Overrules | High Court orders granting bail under Sec. 436-A for death-penalty offences |
| Follows | Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India; Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing Undertrial Prisoners |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Section 436-A CrPC’s “shall-release” provision does not apply to offences carrying the death penalty.
- Article 21’s right to life and speedy trial cannot alone override statutory exclusions for heinous or anti-State crimes.
- Courts must expressly record gravity of offence, stage of trial, risk of tampering, and public-order concerns when deciding bail.
- In UAPA/reverse-burden cases, courts should ensure access to evidence and effective defence preparation.
- Trial courts must now proceed day-to-day post-bail and justify any adjournments; High Courts to monitor compliance.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
-
Statutory Interpretation of Sec. 436-A CrPC
- Excludes offences with death sentence; bail entitlement “shall” apply only to non-death offences.
-
Precedent Review (Vijay Madanlal Choudhary)
- Sec. 436-A is beneficial but not mechanical; court retains discretion to detain beyond half-term for reasons recorded.
-
Article 21 Balancing
- Upholds right to speedy, fair trial; recognizes heightened scrutiny in grave crimes affecting national security.
-
Reverse-Burden Safeguards (UAPA Sec. 43E)
- Acknowledges procedural disadvantage of incarcerated accused; issues in rem and in personam directions to facilitate defence.
-
Bail-Cancellation Principles
- Applies Prasanta Kumar Sarkar and Ashok Dhankad criteria; elapsed time without misuse of bail extinguishes flight risk.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (CBI):
- High Court misapplied Sec. 436-A to offences punishable by death.
- Article 21 cannot override explicit statutory exclusion for heinous, anti-State crimes.
- Gravity of death-train derailment and public-order impact justify continued detention.
Respondents (Accused):
- Prolonged incarceration (over 12 years) violates Article 21’s right to speedy trial.
- Sec. 436-A entitles release upon completion of half the maximum term for non-death offences.
- No evidence of absconding, tampering or misuse of bail since release.
Factual Background
On 28 May 2010 the Jnaneshwari Express derailed between Khemasuli and Sardiha, killing 148 and injuring 170. A CBI FIR under IPC Sections 120B, 302, 307, Indian Railways Act and UAPA alleged that accused removed rail clips to target security forces. Trial has examined 176 of 204 witnesses. After a 2016 bail rejection with a trial-completion direction, the Calcutta High Court granted bail on 9 Nov 2022 and subsequent orders. The CBI challenged bail under Sec. 436-A and Article 21 in SLP (Cr) Nos. 12376-12377/2023.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 436-A CrPC (now BNSS Sec. 479):
- Default-release on personal bond if undertrial’s custody ≥ half the maximum sentence for non-death offences.
- Court may detain beyond half-term for recorded reasons; no detention beyond maximum sentence.
- UAPA Sec. 43E:
- Reverse presumption of guilt: accused must disprove foundational facts amid procedural and resource disadvantages.
- Article 21 Constitution:
- Enshrines right to life and liberty; includes right to speedy and fair trial; subject to legitimate restrictions in national-security cases.
Procedural Innovations
In Personam Directions:
- Trial Court to record status and reasons for delay in pending UAPA cases.
- Day-to-day listing; adjournments only for exceptional reasons.
- High Court Administrative Judge to monitor compliance via monthly reports.
In Rem Directions:
- State Legal Services to ensure undertrial access to legal aid in UAPA cases.
- High Courts to audit backlog, special/Sessions courts, judicial staffing and prosecutor assignments.
- Listing of oldest cases first; four-weekly High Court oversight.
Alert Indicators
- 🚨 Breaking Precedent – High Court bail orders under Sec. 436-A for death-penalty offences set aside
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India; Hussainara Khatoon
- 📅 Time-Sensitive – Directs day-to-day trial and four-weekly monitoring to counter prolonged delays