Supreme Court Partially Grants Bail in Pramod Yadav Case: Balancing Liberty and Criminal Responsibility.


29 October 2025 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law   |   Murder Homicide >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court, on 29 October 2025, issued a balanced order walking the tightrope of individual freedom and judicial restraint in the case of Pramod Yadav & Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Sandeep Mehta handled two interim applications for suspension of sentence and bail pending criminal appeals.

The appeal was filed in Sessions Trial No. 176 of 2010 before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia, Uttar Pradesh, where five persons, including Pramod Yadav and Vinod Yadav, had been tried. Pramod Yadav was convicted by the trial court for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the other three co-accused using Section 34 IPC. A fifth accused was convicted under Section 193 IPC for providing false evidence.

 

 

Whereas all four main accused were given life imprisonment, the High Court, after hearing their appeals, acquitted three of the co-accused but confirmed the convictions of Pramod Yadav and Vinod Yadav. Significantly, in the meantime during the pendency of their appeals in the High Court, the two appellants had been granted bail.

In front of the Supreme Court, both convicts made identical prayers for similar relief against final disposal of their respective appeals. Following hearing of arguments on both sides, the Bench took a differential line. Seeing the character of the evidence and the role assigned to Vinod Yadav, the Court considered it appropriate to put his sentence in abeyance and order his release on bail, subject to terms as ordered by the trial court.

But the same indulgence was refused to Pramod Yadav who was convicted under Section 302 IPC simpliciter for the offense of murder. Yet, the Court noted that he had already spent eight years in rigorous imprisonment and ordered both appeals to be fixed for final hearing within six months' time. In case of any procrastination, the Bench granted Pramod Yadav the freedom to file once again his prayer for suspension of sentence.

This order underscores the Supreme Court’s careful exercise of discretion in cases involving serious offences. It highlights that bail pending appeal, especially in cases under Section 302 IPC, is not automatic but contingent on the role played by the accused, the nature of evidence, and the overall balance between liberty and justice.

By granting relief to some extent and providing for early hearing, the Court reasserted an essential principle: judicial sympathy must be balanced by prudence, especially in regard to convictions of serious offenses like murder.


Section 193., Indian Penal Code - 1860     

Section 302., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Indian Penal Code, 1860