The Supreme Court has granted bail to Hazi Abdul Rajjak in connection with FIR registered at Police Station Omti, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, while withdrawing the earlier undertaking by the prosecution and the time-bound direction requiring the Trial Court to conclude the trial.
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta passed the order arising from an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The matter had earlier come before the Supreme Court concerning the progress of the trial. On July 27, 2026, the Court had recorded the prosecution’s statement that it would withdraw its application under Section 311 CrPC (Section 348 BNSS) seeking recall of two witnesses and would not seek an adjournment on the ground that a handwriting expert’s report concerning a co-accused was awaited. The Court had accordingly declined to grant an adjournment and directed the Trial Court to proceed with the examination of the accused under Section 313 CrPC (Section 351 BNSS) and thereafter hear arguments.
Also Read Supreme Court Quashes Politically Influenced Backdoor Appointments of Four Haryana Engineers
However, the Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the State, informed the Court that he wished to withdraw the earlier statement that the prosecution would not press its application under Section 311 CrPC/Section 348 BNSS. He further submitted that the handwriting expert’s report relating to the co-accused would be relevant to the petitioner’s trial and would be brought on record before the Trial Court.
In view of this change in the prosecution’s position, the Supreme Court held that the reasons recorded in its earlier order dated July 27, 2026 warranted grant of bail to the petitioner. The Court therefore directed that Abdul Rajjak be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.
The Court also specifically recorded that the undertaking given by the Additional Solicitor General in the previous order stood withdrawn. Consequently, the time frame earlier fixed by the Supreme Court for conclusion of the trial also stood withdrawn.
At the same time, the Bench directed both the prosecution and defence to extend full cooperation for conclusion of the trial. It clarified that if the Trial Court or the State finds that the petitioner is delaying the proceedings, they would be at liberty to bring the matter to the Supreme Court’s notice for appropriate orders.
The Supreme Court accordingly disposed of the Special Leave Petition and all pending applications.
