Even murder cases need speedy trial: SC

The Supreme Court of India granted bail to a murder accused, stressing the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, after four years in custody without witness examination

New Delhi: Reiterating that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental guarantee under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has granted bail to an accused in a murder case who had remained in custody for nearly four years without examination of a single witness.

A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi passed the order while allowing a special leave petition (SLP) filed by Sahil Manoj Machare, challenging a Bombay High Court order that had denied him bail in a murder case registered in Maharashtra’s Kolhapur district.

---

Taking note of the prolonged incarceration, the apex court observed that despite charges being framed in 2024, the trial had not progressed at all. We take notice of the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 1-11-2022. Although the charge came to be framed by the Trial Court in the year 2024, yet till this date not a single witness has been examined, the Justice Pardiwala-led Bench recorded.

In these circumstances, the top court held that the continued detention of the accused infringed his fundamental rights. “In such circumstances we are left with no other option but to say that the right of the accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution could be said to have been infringed, the Justice Pardiwala-led Bench said.

It further said that even in serious offences like murder, constitutional safeguards cannot be ignored. “We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is charged with the offence of murder but time and again, we have said that howsoever serious the crime may be, if the right of speedy trial is infringed, then the Court must consider the plea for bail appropriately, the apex court observed.

Noting that the accused had spent “almost 4 years in jail without progress in trial, the Justice Pardiwala-led Bench directed that he be released on bail forthwith, subject to terms and conditions to be imposed by the trial court.

The case was registered at Shahapur Police Station in Kolhapur under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC. The petitioner was arrested on November 1, 2022, and a charge sheet was filed in September 2023. As per the prosecution, the incident occurred during a family gathering in village Tardal, where the victim was allegedly attacked with a sharp weapon and later declared dead. An eyewitness had identified one of the co-accused as the assailant.

Before the Bombay High Court, the accused had argued that his name did not figure in the FIR, no weapon was recovered from him, and the case rested on circumstantial evidence. However, the Bombay High Court declined the bail plea in March 2026, highlighting the gravity of the offence, the presence of prima facie evidence, and its possible impact on the administration of justice.

It had observed that the gravity of the offence and the prima facie evidence of the applicant’s involvement outweigh the grounds for release, and stressed that judicial discretion in serious offences must be exercised cautiously.

A single-judge Bench of Justice Sachin S. Deshmukh had also rejected the argument of delay in trial, stating that proceedings were “under progress and directing parties to cooperate for expeditious disposal instead of filing intervening applications.

Setting aside the impugned order, the Supreme Court held that continued incarceration in such circumstances cannot be justified, and ordered the petitioner’s release, provided he is not required in any other case.