SC sets aside death sentence in 1996 Rajasthan bus blast case, orders fresh trial

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 21, 2026) set aside the conviction and death sentence awarded to Abdul Hameed in the 1996 Samleti bus bomb blast case, nearly three decades after his arrest and almost 12 years after he was sentenced to death. Holding that the proceedings stood vitiated by the denial of effective legal representation and other procedural lapses that undermined the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial, the court ordered a de novo trial to be completed within one year.

The blast on May 22, 1996 ripped through a Rajasthan Roadways bus travelling from Agra to Bikaner near Samleti village in Rajasthan, killing 14 people and injuring 39 others. The attack occurred a day after the Lajpat Nagar bomb blast in Delhi, which claimed 13 lives.

Setting aside a July 2019 judgment of the Rajasthan High Court affirming Dr. Hameed’s conviction and death sentence, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta left the case, for the present, without any convicted accused. While Dr. Hameed will now face a fresh trial, all the other accused stand acquitted.

The ruling authored by Justice Mehta noted that the “trial record unequivocally fortifies” that Dr. Hameed was not provided any meaningful legal assistance. It also pointed out that he had himself cross-examined prosecution witnesses and was left to “fend for himself” despite the case being one of “exceptional seriousness and complexity”.

“The obligation to ensure that the accused is provided appropriate legal aid is upon the Court, and the accused cannot be faulted for the Court’s failure to discharge its constitutional obligation of ensuring a fair trial. The constitutional guarantee of a fair trial is absolutely non-negotiable and cannot be sacrificed at the altar of practical convenience. The administration of criminal justice is founded not merely upon the objective of securing convictions but equally upon the assurance that every conviction is preceded by a procedure which is fair, just and reasonable,” the Bench said.

De novo trial

Accordingly, the apex court directed the Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court to assign the retrial to a trial court in Jaipur, to be presided over by an officer of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service with at least seven years of experience in conducting criminal trials. It also directed the court to make every endeavour to conclude the proceedings within a year from the date the case is assigned.

“Before commencing the trial, the Special Court shall ensure that Dr. Abdul Hameed is represented by a counsel of his choice. In the event the said accused is unable to engage a counsel, the Special Court shall secure competent legal representation for him through the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority by appointing an advocate having not less than ten years’ standing at the Bar as the lead defence counsel, assisted by another advocate having not less than seven years’ standing at the Bar, so as to ensure effective and meaningful legal assistance throughout the proceedings,” the Bench ordered.

While acknowledging the “practical difficulties” in summoning witnesses nearly three decades after the incident, the Bench directed the concerned police authorities to extend full assistance to the trial court and make every effort to secure the presence of witnesses on the dates fixed for recording their evidence so that the retrial proceeds expeditiously.

‘Right to fair trial’

Observing that the right to legal representation is not a “mere formality”, the Bench underlined that the right to a fair trial lies at the heart of criminal jurisprudence and is an inseparable facet of the guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. It added that these principles assume even “greater significance” in cases involving offences that shock the collective conscience of society.

“Acts of violence directed against innocent civilians, particularly those involving the use of explosives in public spaces, strike at the very foundations of social order and generate understandable feelings of fear, grief, and outrage. Yet, it is precisely in such cases that Courts must remain steadfast in their adherence to constitutional values. The gravity of the allegation cannot be permitted to dilute the standard of proof, nor can the enormity of the crime justify a departure from the settled principles governing criminal adjudication,” the Bench said.

The court also referred to the canonical maxim of criminal jurisprudence that it is better for a hundred guilty persons to escape than for one innocent person to be condemned and punished. It observed that the maxim embodies the “profound value that the law places upon individual liberty and human dignity”.

Accordingly, the Bench quashed the 2014 judgment of the trial court convicting Dr. Hameed and sentencing him to death. It further directed that if he moves a bail application, the trial court shall decide it on its own merits, uninfluenced by any findings or observations contained in the earlier judgments.

The court, however, clarified that its decision should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the prosecution’s case.

While granting Dr. Hameed a fresh trial, the apex court also acquitted co-accused Pappu alias Salim, who had been serving a life sentence after being convicted of supplying explosives for the blast and was out on parole after having served more than 23 years of imprisonment.

The court also rejected the Rajasthan government’s appeals seeking to overturn the acquittal of six other accused — Javed Khan, Latif Ahmed, Mohammad Ali Bhatt, Mirja Nissa Hussain and Abdul Ghani, all residents of Jammu and Kashmir, and Rais Beg of Uttar Pradesh.

A trial court in Bandikui had sentenced Dr. Hameed to death in 2014 and imposed life imprisonment on seven other accused. In July 2019, the Rajasthan High Court affirmed Dr. Hameed’s death sentence, holding him to be the principal conspirator who had planted the bomb. It also upheld the life sentence awarded to Pappu alias Salim, while acquitting the remaining six accused after finding the evidence against them insufficient.

Published – July 21, 2026 11:21 pm IST