Property Allotted In Lieu Of Ancestral Land Left In Pakistan Retains Coparcenary Character; Karta Cannot Gift It Away: Punjab & Haryana HC Bail Applicant Under 'Solemn Obligation' To Disclose Criminal History; Material Suppression Disentitles Discretionary Relief: Orissa High Court Mother Surreptitiously Marrying Away Daughter Without Father’s Knowledge Amount To Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Grants Divorce Time Is Generally Not The Essence Of Contract In Sale Of Immovable Property; Unilateral Notice Cannot Alter Mutually Agreed Terms: Himachal Pradesh High Court Mere Use Of Surname No Defence If Adoption Is Dishonest & Causes Confusion In Pharma Trade: Delhi High Court Restrains 'Reddy Pharmaceuticals' Complainant’s Failure To Provide Specific Loan Details & Evidence Of Parties' Involvement In Ponzi Scheme Rebuts Section 139 NI Act Presumption: Calcutta High Court Statutory Mandate Of Section 17-B: Payment Of Minimum Wages Means Revised Rates From Time To Time, Not Frozen Amount: Delhi High Court Reporting Court Proceedings & Good Faith Complaints To Authorities Not Defamation: Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Order Appointment Obtained Via Fraud Vitiates Initial Entry; Article 311 Protection Not Available To Such Employees: Allahabad High Court Surviving Spouse’s Elevation To Second In Line Of Succession Not ‘Manifestly Arbitrary’: Bombay High Court Upholds Goa Succession Act Amendments Patent Rights Stand Exhausted Once Components Are Sourced From Authorized Market Dealers; Royalty Cannot Be Calculated On Entire Product: Delhi High Court FCI Cannot Unilaterally Reduce Rent Or Recover 'Excess' Payment Without Landlord's Consent & Notice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Judicial Sanctity Cannot Be Given To Adulterous Relationships; No Habeas Corpus For Married Woman Living With Husband: Himachal Pradesh High Court Recoveries From Open Spaces Without Proof Of Concealment Don't Qualify Under Section 27 Evidence Act: Supreme Court Large Time Gap In 'Last Seen Together' Theory Snaps Chain Of Circumstances; Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Non-Recovery Of Mobile Phone Or Video Not Fatal To Criminal Intimidation Charge If Victim's Testimony Is Credible: Supreme Court Threat To Upload Private Video Online Violates Woman's Sexual Autonomy, Amounts To 'Imputing Unchastity' Under Sec 506 IPC: Supreme Court Intention To Kill Essential For Section 307 IPC Conviction; Nature Of Injury Not Sole Determinant: Supreme Court Intention To Commit Murder Cannot Be Presumed Merely Because Injury Was Dangerous To Life: Supreme Court Alters Conviction To Section 325 IPC Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused Who Absconded For 42 Days Post-Bail Revocation; Says Contumacious Conduct Bars Fresh Relief High Court Cannot Grant Fresh Bail By Ignoring Supreme Court’s Earlier Order Cancelling Bail Without Change In Circumstances: Supreme Court Mutation Entries Supported By Registered Sale Deeds For Long Period Relevant To Establish Possession: Supreme Court Allegation Of Fraud In Registered Documents Must Be Supported By Foundational Facts; Adverse Inference Drawn If Plaintiff Avoids Witness Box: Supreme Court Commercial Courts Must Assign Reasons For Not Passing Conditional Orders In Summary Judgment Applications: Calcutta High Court Friendly Loan Without Commercial Consideration Not A 'Legally Enforceable Debt' Under Section 138 NI Act: Jharkhand High Court Commercial Courts Act: ₹3 Lakh ‘Specified Value’ Amendment Is Self-Operative; No Separate Govt Notification Required: Andhra Pradesh HC Full Bench Drug Inspector’s Prosecution Voids If Specific Area Of Jurisdiction Is Not Notified In Official Gazette: Kerala High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC | Photostat Copies Of Sale Deeds Not Admissible As Additional Evidence To Fill Gaps In Trial Stage: Punjab & Haryana HC

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