Bail conditions should not be onerous, unreasonable, or excessive. The purpose of bail is not to secure payment but to ensure the accused's appearance, completion of investigation/trial, and the safety of the community.

 


 

 

RAMESH KUMAR …APPELLANT

VS.

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI …RESPONDENT

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO………………… OF 2023

 

This judgment pertains to a case where judicial proceedings initiated by individuals accused of cheating, under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, were being used as a means to recover allegedly cheated money. The courts were imposing conditions for deposit/payment as a prerequisite for granting pre-arrest bail. The judgment highlights the concern regarding this trend and cautions the high courts and sessions courts against being swayed by such undertakings.

The specific case involved the appellant, who owned an immovable property and had entered into agreements with a builder for redevelopment. The builder had also entered into an agreement with complainants for the purchase of a floor in the proposed building. The complainants alleged that they made payments to the appellant and the builder but did not receive possession of the property as agreed upon. Subsequently, a complaint was filed, resulting in the registration of an FIR under sections 420/406/34 of the IPC.

The appellant sought anticipatory bail and the high court granted bail with certain conditions, including the deposit of a specified amount by both the appellant and the builder. The appellant challenged the condition of depositing Rs. 22,00,000/- (Rupees twenty-two lakh) in the form of a fixed deposit receipt (FDR) with the trial court.

In analyzing the legality of the condition imposed, the judgment refers to previous precedents. It emphasizes that while granting anticipatory bail, courts should strike a balance between an individual's right to personal freedom and the right of police investigation. Conditions imposed should be necessary to ensure an uninterrupted investigation and should not be unrelated to the fairness or propriety of the investigation or trial. The court should exercise restraint in imposing conditions and consider factors such as the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice.

Based on these principles, the court finds that the condition of depositing Rs. 22,00,000/- (Rupees twenty-two lakh) is onerous and unreasonable. It notes that the court had not even determined the truth of the allegations at that stage. The judgment emphasizes that the power to impose conditions should be exercised reasonably and effectively, without defeating the purpose of granting bail. It concludes that the present circumstances do not warrant such an extreme condition.

The Supreme Court, considering various precedents, highlights that bail conditions should not be onerous, unreasonable, or excessive. The court emphasizes that the purpose of bail is not to secure payment but to ensure the accused's appearance, completion of investigation/trial, and the safety of the community. The court finds that the condition imposed by the High Court was inappropriate, considering the predominantly civil nature of the dispute.

The court disapproves of using criminal law to settle civil disputes and remits the matter back to the High Court for reconsideration of the application for pre-arrest bail without the imposed condition. The appellant's liberty shall not be infringed by the investigating officer until further orders are passed by the High Court, but the appellant is required to cooperate with the investigation.

 

4 July 2023

 

v  In the judgment, the following sections of the Indian legal framework are mentioned:

 

  1. Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): This section pertains to the provision of anticipatory bail, which allows a person to seek bail in anticipation of an arrest. The court discusses the conditions for granting anticipatory bail under this section.
  2. Sections 420/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
    • Section 420 IPC deals with the offense of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.
    • Section 406 IPC deals with the offense of criminal breach of trust.
    • Section 34 IPC deals with the concept of joint liability when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention.

 

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post