As per the case facts, there has been a continuous influx of cases seeking bail due to a misinterpretation of Section 170 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. An endeavor ... was made by the Supreme Court to categorize offense types for future guidelines, with assistance from senior counsel. The appeal to the Supreme Court involves a miscellaneous application concerning bail and related issues. The question arose regarding the proper interpretation and application of bail provisions, specifically Sections 170, 436A, and 440 of the Cr.P.C., and establishing guidelines for their consistent disposal. Finally, the Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines to ensure proper compliance with bail provisions. The Court emphasized that while insisting upon sureties, the mandate of Section 440 of the Code must be strictly followed. It directed that an exercise similar to that in Bhim Singh (supra) be undertaken to comply with Section 436A of the Code at both the district judiciary and High Court levels, followed by appropriate orders for release. The Court mandated that bail applications, excluding intervening applications, should be disposed of within two weeks, and anticipatory bail applications should be disposed of within six weeks, again with the exception of intervening applications. Furthermore, all State Governments, Union Territories, and High Courts are directed to submit affidavits or status reports within a period of four months to demonstrate compliance with these directives. This judgment aims to streamline and standardize the bail process, ensuring liberty is upheld efficiently.