Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Determining the Amount of Surety at an Unreasonably High Amount Defeats the Very Purpose of Grant of Bail – Supreme Court on Excessive Bail Amount

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has intervened to reduce an excessively high bail amount, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that bail conditions are reasonable and do not infringe on the constitutional right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. The petitioner, a retired office clerk, challenged the bail amount set at Rs 10 lakhs, which was beyond his financial capability.

The petitioner, accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including fraud and criminal conspiracy, was unable to secure release due to the high surety amount set by the High Court and the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj. Following his inability to furnish the surety, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court, citing an infringement of his right under Article 21 of the Constitution.

 

Purpose of Bail and Surety: The Court noted that the fundamental objective of bail is to ensure the accused’s presence during the trial. Setting an exorbitant bail amount contradicts this purpose and infringes upon personal liberty.

Impact of High Bail Amount: The Court observed that the petitioner, a retired office clerk, continued to be incarcerated despite the High Court’s order for release on bail, solely due to his inability to meet the high financial demand of the surety.

Interpretation of High Court’s Order: The Supreme Court remarked that the High Court’s directive for a “heavy surety” should have been reasonably interpreted by the trial judge, considering the petitioner’s economic status.

Decision: The Supreme Court ordered the reduction of the surety and personal bond from Rs 10 lakhs to Rs 25,000. This decision underscores the Court’s commitment to ensuring fair and reasonable interpretation of bail conditions, in line with the principles of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution.

 Date of Decision: 15th March 2024

Ashok Sandeep Singh vs The State of Uttar Pradesh

Latest Legal News