Noting that jail without trial amounts to punishment, the Supreme Court has granted bail to a Punjab man who has been in jail for almost two years for alleged extortion and attempted murder.A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice PV Varale said accused Pradeep Kumar alias Banu was booked for attempt to murder and certain other offences in February 2024, but the prosecution had yet to examine any one of the 23 witnesses in the case.“Almost two years have passed since the appellant was arrested, without a trial having commenced and a conclusion thereof nowhere being in sight. Incarceration without trial amounts to punishment. Taking an overall view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that further detention of the appellant pending trial is not necessary; and, since the appeal deserves acceptance, the appellant may be admitted to an order for grant of bail,” the court said.Appellant Kumar’s name figuring as an accused in FIR No.17 dated February 11, 2024 registered at Police Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab under Sections 386, 307, 506 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25(6) and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (Sections 482 and 411 of IPC added later on), and he was arrested on April 13, 2024. His bail plea was rejected by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on July 11, 2025.Setting aside the high court’s denial of bail to Kumar, the top court said, “Appellant (Kumar) shall be released on bail, subject to furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to such other terms and conditions as may be imposed by it.”The bench, however, clarified that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.“Needless to observe, the appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, by making inducement, threat or promise, dissuade any person acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to the court,” the top court said in its March 13 order.“It is also ordered that the appellant shall diligently attend proceedings of the trial, unless exempted. If he abstains from attending the proceedings without justifiable cause, that could also be seen as a breach of the conditions for the grant of bail, and the trial court will be free to pass appropriate orders,” the bench said.The bench made it clear that “In the event there is any breach of the terms and conditions for grant of bail, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant.”“Prosecution proposes to examine 23 witnesses to drive home the charges against the appellant, but none have been examined. Thus, the trial is likely to take some time to conclude,” it noted.