The Delhi High Court has ruled that trial courts must promptly decide bail applications under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, instead of mechanically adjourning them, especially in cases where undertrial prisoners have already served half of the maximum imprisonment prescribed for their alleged offence.

The Single Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized that if a judge handling such matters proceeds on leave, the case must be brought to the attention of the concerned Link Judge for priority listing at the earliest possible date.

"This Court is also of the opinion that in case a judge proceeds on leave, it will be beneficial if there are instructions with the concerned staff to bring it to the notice of the Link Judge that such cases are to be taken up on priority, either on the next date or at the shortest possible date," the Court said.

Section 479 of BNSS mandates that undertrial prisoners, who have undergone detention for half of the maximum sentence for offences not punishable by death or life imprisonment, shall be granted bail. Furthermore, first-time offenders must be released on bail if they have completed one-third of the maximum sentence they could face upon conviction.

Advocate Shikhar Khare appeared for the petitioner, and Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Raj Kumar appeared for the State.

Facts of the Case

The Court was hearing a bail plea of a 60-year-old accused in a POCSO case. The FIR was filed based on a complaint by the victim’s mother. The accused, citing old age and health ailments, argued that he had been in jail for over 18 months and was eligible for bail under Section 479.

Despite the jail authorities forwarding a letter to the trial court in December 2024, confirming that the accused had completed one-third of the maximum sentence, and an accompanying bail application, the trial court repeatedly adjourned the matter. The accused's counsel submitted that the bail plea, filed in November 2024, remained pending due to unwarranted delays.

Court's Observations

"Needless to state, it is expected of the learned Trial Court to have, in such cases, promptly passed an order on such bail applications, in view of Section 479 of BNSS, and in case the Court was on leave i.e. on 11.12.2024, 13.12.2024, 20.12.2024 (half day) and 08.01.2025 – as evident from the order sheets of learned Trial Court – such matter should have been taken up on next day itself or a shorter date could have been given, in order to dispose of the bail application of the accused and grant him the relief, if found entitled to the same as per law, as the accused has been in judicial custody now for about 1 year and 10 months, and the victim and her mother are not appearing before the learned Trial Court for their evidence," the Court said.

The Court strongly criticized the Trial Court's approach, stating, "It is discouraging to note that despite the mandate of Section 479 of BNSS, the trial court mechanically adjourned the matter on multiple occasions, even after acknowledging on 08.01.2025 that the report on the accused’s previous involvement had been received, and still set a hearing date nearly 20 days later."

The Single Judge directed the trial court to adjudicate the bail application within seven days, reinforcing the legal obligation to ensure timely decisions in such cases. "...considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, this Court directs the learned Trial Court to decide the bail application of the applicant (in terms of Section 479 of BNSS), pending before it, within seven days from the receipt of this order. The Registry is also directed to ensure that this order is communicated to the learned Trial Court, latest by tomorrow, including through electronic means. With these directions, the present bail application stands disposed of," the Court ordered.

Cause Title: Suleman Samad v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors. [Neutral Citation No. 2025: DHC: 503]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Shikhar Khare, Shahzeb Ahmed, Shashi Kumar, Adeel Ahmad Khan, Wasil Khan, Utkarsh

Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Raj Kumar

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice Swarana Kanta SharmaBail ApplicationSection 479 BNSS

Sukriti Mishra

Legal Correspondent

Sukriti Mishra is a Legal Correspondent at Verdictum. She extensively covers the Supreme Court. She has completed her graduation with BA. LL.B (Hons.) from The ICFAI University, Dehradun. Sukriti started covering courts in March 2022, she has previously worked with another legal news portal, where she extensively covered Delhi High Court and Trial Courts. She believes Legal Journalism gives her creative freedom and legal in depth practical knowledge. She enjoys the diversity of her profession. Sukriti truly believes in bringing the raw courtroom exchanges to the general public through proper channels, especially with the high legal awareness in society.