Monday, 2 November 2026
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Law

Over 19 Years in Jail: Supreme Court Grants Bail Pending Appeal to Two Life Convicts on Parity

Published: · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court granted leave and enlarged two life convicts from West Bengal on bail pending their criminal appeal, as each had completed more than 19 years of incarceration. It relied on its own order of 28.07.2026, which had suspended a co-convict's sentence and released him on bail for the same reason, and directed that the two appeals be heard together (paras 1, 6-9).

Over 19 Years in Jail: Supreme Court Grants Bail Pending Appeal to Two Life Convicts on Parity

Judgment Intelligence

Bail Granted
Debasish @ Bapi Biswas & Anr. v. State of West Bengal
Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2026 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 18321 of 2026)
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
29 October 2026
Bench
Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar
Relevant Acts & Sections
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 120B, 396, 201 and 412
Final Outcome

Bail granted pending the appeal after leave was granted: the two appellants are to be enlarged on bail on usual terms and conditions, and the appeal is to be heard with Criminal Appeal No. 4809 of 2025 (paras 1, 8-9).

Source Supreme Court of India, www.sci.gov.in — order dated 29 October 2026 · Court's copy

Key holdings

  1. Leave was granted and the two appellants, serving life sentences, were enlarged on bail pending their criminal appeal on usual terms and conditions (paras 1, 8).
  2. The only grounds recorded are parity with a co-convict released on 28.07.2026 and more than 19 years of incarceration (paras 6-7).
  3. The order says nothing on the merits of the conviction; the appeal is to be heard with the co-convict's Criminal Appeal No. 4809 of 2025 (para 9).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

The Trial Court convicted the appellants under Sections 120B, 396, 201 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced them to life imprisonment (para 2). The Calcutta High Court rejected their appeal, CRA No. 255/2021, by its judgment of 14.08.2025 (para 3). They then filed a special leave petition, and notice was issued on 21.09.2026 both on the petition and on the prayer for bail (paras 4-5). On 29.10.2026 the Court granted leave (para 1).

Court's Findings

The order rests on two facts. First, by its order of 28.07.2026 in Criminal Appeal No. 4809 of 2025, the Court had suspended the sentence of a co-convict and enlarged him on bail, considering that he had undergone incarceration for more than 19 years (para 6). Second, the two appellants, Debasish @ Bapi Biswas and Tapash Karmakar @ Tapu, had also completed more than 19 years of incarceration (para 7). Having regard to these facts, the Court directed that, pending consideration of the present criminal appeal, they be enlarged on bail on 'usual terms and conditions' (para 8). It gave no other reason, said nothing on the merits of the conviction and set no specific bail terms. The appeal is to be listed for hearing along with Criminal Appeal No. 4809 of 2025 (para 9).

Legal Principle

The order lays down no new rule. It rests on parity and time served: a co-convict had his sentence suspended and was enlarged on bail after more than 19 years in custody, and the two appellants, who had served as long, received bail pending their own appeal (paras 6-8).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

For a life convict whose appeal is pending before the Supreme Court, this order shows two points that weighed with the Court: the time already spent in custody, here more than 19 years, and an earlier order releasing a co-convict on that footing (paras 6-7). A bail prayer on these lines should state the custody period precisely and place any order passed for a co-convict on record. The order gives no further reasons and does not touch the merits (para 8), so it is an example of parity applied, not a statement of law. Compare Vikash Kumar, a Supreme Court order of 09.10.2026 on parity in bail and suspension of sentence.

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.

NyayVidhan
Court Judgments · 2 min read
Decided: 29 October 2026 Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar
PDF
Join our WhatsApp Group
✕

Try: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt