Supreme Court Grants Bail to Odisha Life Convict After 22 Years Behind Bars

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has granted bail to Arjun Jani, a life convict from Odisha, who has spent over 22 years in prison. The court criticized the Orissa High Court for dismissing his appeal due to a lengthy delay, emphasizing the need for a more compassionate approach. Jani's positive conduct in jail and the lengthy duration of his incarceration were key factors in the Supreme Court's decision. This ruling highlights the importance of justice and fair consideration in the legal system, especially for long-term inmates. The case is set for compliance reporting on May 28, raising questions about the treatment of convicts in similar situations.

By Narendra Chaudhary May 8, 2026, 14:15 IST

Supreme Court's Decision on Long-Term Incarceration

New Delhi/Cuttack: The Supreme Court has intervened to grant bail to a life convict from Odisha, who has spent over 22 years in prison. This decision comes after the court expressed serious concerns regarding an Orissa High Court ruling that dismissed his criminal appeal due to a significant delay in its filing.

The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan, described the High Court's decision as 'very disturbing.' They emphasized that the High Court should have taken a more pragmatic approach and at least allowed the convict to present his case based on its merits.

The case arose from a special leave petition filed by Arjun Jani, also known as Tuntun, challenging the January 11, 2016, ruling of the Orissa High Court, which had rejected his appeal due to a delay of 3,157 days in contesting his murder conviction.

Jani was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge in Nabarangpur, Odisha, under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment on August 25, 2006.

In its dismissal, the High Court noted the appeal was significantly overdue and found no valid reason to excuse the nearly nine-year delay, leading to the rejection of both the delay application and the appeal.

The Supreme Court criticized the High Court's stance, pointing out that Jani had already served over 12 years of his sentence when he filed the appeal. The justices argued that the nature of the appeal, being filed from jail, warranted a more compassionate consideration.

The court remarked, 'The High Court should have recognized that the petitioner had already been imprisoned for over 12 years. Given that this was a jail appeal, it should have prompted a more sympathetic view, allowing the delay to be condoned and giving the petitioner a chance to argue his case.'

The Supreme Court also highlighted that Jani has not been granted parole or furlough during his nearly 22 years of incarceration.

The petitioner's lawyer presented a conduct certificate from the Senior Superintendent of Circle Jail, Koraput, indicating that Jani's behavior in prison has been exemplary, with no negative remarks or disciplinary actions recorded against him.

Considering the lengthy imprisonment and the positive conduct report, the Supreme Court concluded, 'We are persuaded to release the petitioner on bail given the unique circumstances of this case.'

The court ordered Jani's release on bail upon providing a personal bond of Rs 10,000, subject to the Jail Superintendent's approval. Additionally, it instructed the District Legal Services Authority in Koraput to assist him in preparing a representation for sentence remission according to the applicable policy.

The bench noted, 'This order is made with the understanding that the petitioner has been serving his sentence for over 22 years without any release, and his conduct has been satisfactory.'

The case is scheduled for a compliance report on May 28.