Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MANOJ MISRA, MANMOHAN, JJ.
Akram Hossain Mondal @ Akram Mondal @ Akram Hosen Mondal – Appellant
Versus
The State Of West Bengal – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1009 of 2026 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 15405 of 2025
Decided On : 19-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail order and basis for appeal. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. opposition to bail noted. (Para 5) |
| 3. court's reasoning for granting bail. (Para 6) |
| 4. conclusion and order for bail release. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. This appeal impugns order dated 25.07.2025 passed by the High Court at Calcutta rejecting the regular bail prayer of the appellant in connection with Case No. 746/2023, registered at P.S. Sankrail, District Howrah.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the High Court had rejected the first bail prayer vide order dated 16.01.2025 by observing that the trial shall be expedited and the trial court shall take all steps to conclude the trial at an early date. It is submitted that against the aforesaid order special leave petition was filed but based on the aforesaid observations, the same was withdrawn. However, till date only one witness, out of 11 prosecution witnesses, has been examined even though, by now, the appellant has suffered pending trial incarceration of a period exceeding 2 years 4 months. In that context, it has been prayed that the appellant be released on bail particularly when he has no previous criminal antecedents.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent State has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he could not dispute that till date only one witness out of 11 prosecution witnesses has been examined in trial.
6. Having regard to the nature of allegations, length of pending trial incarceration as also there being no previous criminal antecedents of the appellant, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the prosecution case, we are of the view that appellant is entitled to be released on bail pending trial.
7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order passed by the High Court rejecting the regular bail prayer of the appellant is set aside.
8. The appellant shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court may deem fit to impose in the facts and circumstances of the case.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
The court granted bail due to prolonged incarceration and absence of prior criminal history, emphasizing the importance of timely trial proceedings.
Bail applications must consider trial progress and the defendant's history; prolonged detention without trial progress can justify granting bail.
The court granted bail to a septuagenarian accused, emphasizing that prolonged detention pending trial is unwarranted, while clarifying that this does not affect the merits of the case.
The mere existence of pending criminal cases cannot justify the denial of bail without considering the accused's specific involvement in the crime.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of the district judiciary's independence in considering bail applications and highlights the appropriateness of the Trial Judge's exercise of discretion to gran....
The appellate court emphasized that bail decisions must adhere to established legal principles and prior rulings, ensuring that serious offenses are appropriately adjudicated.
The need for expeditious disposal of bail applications and disapproval of the practice of dismissing interim relief.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
