The Supreme Court of India set aside as “manifestly perverse” a High Court order granting bail to accused persons who allegedly murdered a key eyewitness while already on bail. In Lakshmanan v. State, the Court noted that the accused were initially granted bail in a serious offence under the IPC and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. While on bail, they allegedly committed a second grave offence by killing a crucial witness, striking at the very foundation of a fair trial. Despite this, the High Court granted bail again and even directed a joint trial of two distinct cases. The Supreme Court held that although the victim had been heard as required under Section 15A(5) of the SC/ST Act, the High Court failed to meaningfully assess the gravity of offences, prior bail cancellation, criminal antecedents, and threat to witnesses. The reliance on unrelated civil disputes was termed irrelevant. The direction for a joint trial was also quashed, as the cases involved different incidents and could not be mechanically clubbed. The bail was cancelled, and the accused were directed to surrender, reaffirming that misuse of bail and witness intimidation cannot be tolerated.