LexIRFAN versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 1475 : 2025 INSC 1012 Irfan v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 3579 of 2025) 18 August 2025 [Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the Respondent No.2 holding that any further detention would be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Headnotes† Bail – Grant of – When not justified – FIR filed against Respondent No.2-accused u/ss.147, 148, 302, 304 and 34, IPC alleging that along with his two sons he committed the murder of appellant’s father – Eventually, bail granted by High Court – Propriety: Held: High Court relied upon a decision of another co-ordinate Bench in the case of Prabhat Gangwar wherein it was held that in an application for grant of bail, the Court is competent to set an accused on liberty to afford him an opportunity to frame his defence and gather evidence, to enable him to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence – However, the Court cautioned that such liberty on the said ground cannot be applied mechanically and requires to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case – All relevant facts including the evidence on record, conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as the trial have to be adverted to before enlarging the accused on bail – The view expressed in Prabhat Gangwar may be applied in rare cases but in the light of the observations made therein – However, the High Court failed to evaluate the facts and circumstances of the present case especially the conduct of the accused and granted bail solely on the ground that further incarceration will deprive the accused from an effective defence strategy – Although, no such basis was set out by Respondent No.2 for seeking bail as to what kind of defence strategy and the evidence that was required to be collected or what were the special facts and circumstances of the case which required this kind of indulgence – Impugned order erroneous, set aside. [Paras 4, 5, 8] 1476 [2025] 8 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Case Law Cited Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P., decision of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2586 of 2023 – referred to. List of Acts Penal Code, 1860, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Bail; Further detention of the accused detrimental to defence in the trial; Further incarceration; Accused deprived from an effective defence strategy; Liberty to accused; Opportunity to frame defence and gather evidence; To enable accused to refute the prosecution case; To enable accused to establish his innocence; Fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 3579 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 12-05-2025 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in CRMBA No. 11471 of 2025 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv., Ms. Suvarna Swain, Shashank Kapoor, Aman Naqvi, Yashwant Singh. Advs. for the Respondents: Ameet Singh, Yunus Malik, Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Nishant Sharma, Aman Malik, Ankit Ambasta, Dr. Vijendra Singh, Ms. Apurva Singh, Gautam Kumar. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Order 1. Leave granted. 2. The informant is before this Court assailing the correctness of the order dated 12.05.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at [2025] 8 S.C.R. 1477 Irfan v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Allahabad1 allowing the Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11471 of 2025, titled Riyasuddin vs. State of U.P., primarily on the ground that any further detention of the accused-applicant2 therein would be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal processual jurisprudence. 3. Relevant facts for adjudication of this appeal are: i. The appellant alleged in his complaint, which was registered as FIR No. 694 of 2022 at Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 304 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 that Respondent No.2, along with his two sons-Sarfaraz and Umardin and one Afsar, committed the murder of his father-Idris and also caused injuries dangerous to life to his brother-Imram. It was further stated in the complaint that the accused had chased the complainant’s father inside a mosque and opened fire on him. Investigation was com
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.