The Allahabad High Court has held that in cases of long-term incarceration of undertrial prisoners, automatic release cannot be claimed solely on the basis of Section 479 of BNSS, i.e., on the ground of having undergone a substantial portion of the maximum punishment. Such a claim becomes valid only when the Undertrial Review Committee (UTRC) completes the prescribed procedure and submits its recommendation. The Court cannot directly release an accused under Section 479 of BNSS without the mandatory UTRC process being completed.
The Court clarified that:
“….the standard operating procedure laid down and approved for extending the benefit of the provisions of Section 479 BNSS to the applicant has yet not been undertaken by the UTRC. In the opinion of the Court in the absence of such an exercise and recommendation by the UTRC the Bail Application of the Applicant cannot be considered at this stage. The communication of the Jail Superintendent dated 11.07.2015 referred to hereinbefore on which heavy reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the applicant is of no avail to the applicant.”
This clarification was given by the Single Bench of Justice Ashutosh Srivastava while rejecting the bail application of Aadya Prasad Tewari. Before the Court, the defence argued that the accused has been in jail since 22 September 2021 and the maximum punishment for the alleged offence is ten years; therefore, on completing one-third of the maximum punishment as a first-time offender, release under Section 479 becomes mandatory. The defence also relied upon a communication from the Jail Superintendent to assert that the accused had fulfilled the statutory conditions.
Opposing the plea, CBI and victim’s counsel Rahul Srivastava informed the Court that delay in framing of charges and subsequent adjournments were caused due to the accused and his advocates, obstructing the trial. It was further submitted that the Jail Superintendent’s letter dated 11.07.2025 cannot be of any assistance because there is no report from the UTRC regarding eligibility of the accused for the statutory benefit under Section 479 of BNSS.
Supporting the prosecution, the Court observed:
“A perusal of the provisions of Section 479 B.N.S.S. reveals that the benefit contemplated therein is not available to such undertrials charged with heinous offence punishable with death sentence or life imprisonment. The 1st proviso to Section 479 B.N.S.S. specifies that for the first time offenders, who have not been convicted of any offence in the past shall be released on bond by the court if the person has undergone detention for a period up to 1/3rd of the maximum period of imprisonment, specified for such offence under the law………………”
During the hearing, the Court further observed that,
“……………..The explanation to the said section provides that for computing the period of detention under the Section for granting bail, the period of detention passed due to delay in proceedings caused by the accused is to be excluded.”
The Court held that although Section 479 is a beneficial provision, as per the directions of the Supreme Court in Re–Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, the eligibility and recommendation by the UTRC is mandatory before any Court can consider release under this provision:
“………….ends of justice shall stand subserved if appropriate directions are issued to the Under Trial Review Committee (UTRC)………..to submit a report recommending the applicant for release from jail or otherwise.”
Although the Court rejected the bail application at the present stage, it did not bar the continuation of further proceedings. The Court emphasised that in the interest of justice, the UTRC shall review the case and recommend whether or not the accused deserves release under Section 479. The Committee has been directed to submit its report within two months from the date of service of the order.
Case: Aadya Prasad Tewari vs State of U.P. and Another
