Prolonged pre-trial custody supports bail where trial has not begun and charges remain unframed, with conditions imposed.

Prolonged custody, where the charge-sheet had been filed but the trial had not commenced and charges had not been framed, justified grant of bail. The Supreme Court also noted that bail had already been granted in connected matters under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and considered the appellant's custody status and the procedural stage of the case. Concerns about absconding were addressed by directing that bail be granted on conditions to be fixed by the trial court after hearing the Public Prosecutor, and the High Court's order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant, who had remained in custody for over two years and whose trial had not commenced, was entitled to bail.

Analysis: The appellant was in custody for a substantial period while charge-sheet had been filed long ago but neither the trial had commenced nor charges had been framed. The Court noted that in the connected matters under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, bail had already been granted, and took into account the overall custody status and the stage of proceedings. The apprehension of absconding was addressed by directing that bail be granted on appropriate conditions to be fixed by the trial court after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to bail, and the order of the High Court was set aside.

---