In a significant ruling on May 22, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to a petitioner whose plea had been adjourned 27 times by the Allahabad High Court. The apex court strongly criticized the delay, stating that in matters concerning personal liberty, High Courts cannot keep adjourning without taking action.

"In matters of personal liberty, the High Courts are not expected to keep the matter pending for such a long time and do nothing, except for adjourning from time to time," the Supreme Court observed.

Read also: Arrest of Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad: A Case of Misuse of Power and Constitutional Concerns

The petitioner had been in jail for more than four years, and despite multiple listings, the High Court had not delivered a decision. With the bail matter pending for long, the Supreme Court remarked that the delay was unjustified, especially when the evidence of the complainant had already been recorded.

The case was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih. The Supreme Court had issued notice in the case earlier, on April 21, taking note of the prolonged custody and the repeated postponements of the bail application.

During the latest hearing, Advocate Raja Choudhary, appearing for the petitioner, informed the court that the matter was listed yet again in the High Court for the 28th time on the same day. He added,

Read also: CJI BR Gavai Urges Bar Associations to Support Young Lawyers with CSR-Funded Group Insurance

"I am in custody since 3 years, 8 months, and 24 days."

The petitioner challenged a March 20 order by the High Court, which had once again adjourned the matter by two weeks and directed that the complainant’s evidence be recorded — a step already completed. The charges against the petitioner involve alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Opposing the bail plea, Additional Solicitor General Raja Thakare, representing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), argued that the petitioner was involved in 33 other cases.

However, this was countered by Advocate Choudhary, who clarified that 27 of those cases were registered only after the petitioner’s arrest, and that he had already secured bail in all of them. Upon being questioned by the bench, he revealed that only 3 out of 365 witnesses had been examined so far.

Read also: SC Directs Centre To Notify New Rules For Consumer Forum Appointments; Ensures 5-Year Tenur

Justice BR Gavai sharply questioned the conduct of the High Court:

"He has been inside for four years, High Court is not deciding anything, adjourned it on 27 occasions in a matter pertaining to personal liberty. For the last 27 occasions the High Court has not done anything. How do you expect it to do anything on the 28th occasion?"

The Supreme Court concluded the matter by granting bail to the petitioner and held that the bail application pending before the High Court was now infructuous due to the long delay.

This decision highlights the Supreme Court’s clear message: cases involving personal liberty deserve swift and fair consideration and cannot be subjected to indefinite postponements, especially when the accused has spent years in custody without trial progress.

Case Details: LAKSHYA TAWAR Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION|SLP(Crl) No. 5480/2025