Supreme Court: Under which circumstance the court can release convict on personal bond after acquittal in appeal?

 It would be a travesty of justice if the petitioner is unable

to secure the benefit of bail order for his inability to furnish

local surety. This will infringe the rights guaranteed under

Article 21 of the Constitution for the person, who continues to be

detained despite a bail order in his favour. {Para 6}

7. Having considered the circumstances here, we deem it

appropriate to say that the petitioner be released on bail on his

personal bond without insisting on local surety, to ensure

compliance with this Court’s bail order dated 03.05.2024.

 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3363/2024

RAMCHANDRA THANGAPPAN AACHARI  Vs

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 

 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI

Date : 18-09-2024

 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

Print Page

Whether passport authority can reject application of accused for passport on the ground that she has not furnished surety as per S 437A of CRPC after her acquittal?

 As noted above, the said order confirming the

Judgment and Order of acquittal, has not been challenged by the

CBI. It is pertinent to note that the purpose of Section 437A

Cr.P.C is to enable the Court to execute bail bonds with surety

from the accused, so as to enable them to appear before the High

Court as and when the Court issues notice in respect of any

appeal or petition filed against the judgments of the respective

Courts. Under Section 437A, the bail bonds are to remain in force for six months as per sub-section (2) of Section 437A and if the accused fails to appear, the bail bond shall stand forfeited under provision under Section 446 would thereafter apply. Section 446 deals with the procedure when bond has to be forfeited.  {Para 12}

13 From the facts as narrated aforesaid, it is evident that

the petitioner had indeed furnished PR Bond as directed by the

Court and the trial Court had extended time to furnish surety. In

the interregnum, CBI had filed an appeal against the petitioner’s

acquittal and that the petitioner had appeared before the High

Court, pursuant to the notice and subsequently, after hearing the

parties, had rejected CBI’s application seeking leave to file appeal.

14 In these circumstances, there was no justification for

the CBI to give a report as given by the CBI to the respondent

No. 2. The object of Section 437A is to secure the presence of an

accused before the higher forum, after the acquittal. The

petitioner had infact furnished PR Bond of Rs. 50,000/- before

the trial Court. In the present case, the petitioner infact,

appeared before the High Court, pursuant to the notice issued in

the appeal filed by the CBI. In these circumstances, the CBI

ought to have been fair and ought to have accordingly given a

report, instead of stating that the case matter is still pending in

CBI and her file should not be cleared, when infact, there was no

proceeding pending before any Court of law, at the relevant time.

Neither has the learned counsel for the CBI been able to point

out, what were the proceedings which were pending before the

CBI at the time when such a report was forwarded to the

respondent No. 2-Authority. Therefore, the report given by the

CBI to the respondent No. 2 was clearly contrary to what had

really taken place.

17 Since the petitioner’s earlier application seeking

issuance of passport has been closed, we grant liberty to the

petitioner to apply afresh for issuance of fresh passport. If an

application is made for issuance of fresh passport, the respondent

No. 2 to issue the same in accordance with law under the

Passport Act and its Rules and keeping in mind what is stated

aforesaid in this order. The application, if filed, be considered

expeditiously.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3017 OF 2023

Jigna Jitendra Vora Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors. 

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

GAURI GODSE, JJ.

MONDAY, 25 th SEPTEMBER 2023

Print Page

Whether it is mandatory for court to take bail from accused as per S 437A of CRPC if he is acquitted?

437-A. Bail to require accused to appear before the next Appellate Court.- (1) Before conclusion of the trial and before disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the offence or the Appellate Court, as the case may be, shall require the accused to execute bail bonds with sureties, to appear before the Higher Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of any appeal or petition filed against the judgment of the respective Court and such bail bonds shall be in force for six months.

(2) if such accused fails to appear, the bond stand forfeited and the procedure under section 446 shall apply.

14. In our view, though the section states that trial Court may direct the accused to execute the P.R. Bond with sureties the said directions of execution of P.R. Bond with sureties will have to be treated as directory order and not mandatory order since the said provision will have to be read alongwith other provisions which are there in the Cr.P.C. viz. Sections 441, 445 and, therefore discretion would vest in the trial Court of directing the accused to execute a P.R. Bond and also ensure that his presence is secured in the manner as stated aforesaid in para 13 above.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Application No. 1087 of 2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 2007

Decided On: 17.10.2011

 Farooq Abdul Gani Surve Vs.  State of Maharashtra

Print Page

Whether court can release convict on bail as per S 437A of CRPC?

437-A. Bail to require accused to appear before the next Appellate Court.- (1) Before conclusion of the trial and before disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the offence or the Appellate Court, as the case may be, shall require the accused to execute bail bonds with sureties, to appear before the Higher Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of any appeal or petition filed against the judgment of the respective Court and such bail bonds shall be in force for six months.

(2) if such accused fails to appear, the bond stand forfeited and the procedure under section 446 shall apply.

14. In our view, though the section states that trial Court may direct the accused to execute the P.R. Bond with sureties the said directions of execution of P.R. Bond with sureties will have to be treated as directory order and not mandatory order since the said provision will have to be read alongwith other provisions which are there in the Cr.P.C. viz. Sections 441, 445 and, therefore discretion would vest in the trial Court of directing the accused to execute a P.R. Bond and also ensure that his presence is secured in the manner as stated aforesaid in para 13 above.

15. From the language of section 437A, it is apparent that the said provision is applicable only in cases where the trial Court acquits the accused and it would not be applicable on conviction of the accused. All the Sessions Court are, therefore, directed not to release the convicted accused on bail under this provision.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Application No. 1087 of 2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 2007

Decided On: 17.10.2011

 Farooq Abdul Gani Surve Vs.  State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.M. Kanade and A.M. Thipsay, JJ.

Print Page

Whether it is mandatory for accused to obtain bail U/S 437A of CRPC even if he is acquitted?

While   hearing   the   application
seeking leave to appeal filed by the State or
the victim as the case may be challenging the
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court,
we   have   noticed   in   many   cases   that   the
mandate of provision of Section 437­A of Code
of   Criminal   Procedure   is   not   scrupulously
followed   and   it   creates   difficulties   and
hindrances   to   secure   presence   of

accused/respondent in appeal preferred before
the higher Court. On careful reading of the
said   provision,  it   is   abundantly   clear   that
before   conclusion   of   the   trial   and   before
disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the
offence or the Appellate Court, as the case
may be, shall require the accused to execute
bail   bonds   with   sureties,   to   appear   before
the   higher   court   as   and   when   such   Court
issues   notice   in   respect   of   any   appeal   or
petition   filed   against   the   judgment   of   the
respective Court and such bail bonds shall be
in force for six months.   
 In   that   view   of   the   matter,   it   is
necessary   to   bring   to   the   notice   of   the
learned Judges of the Trial Courts as well as
appellate   Courts,   dealing   with   the   criminal
matters  that   they   should   follow  the  mandate
of   Section   437­A   of   Code   of   Criminal
Procedure   scrupulously   before   conclusion   of
the trial or before disposal of the appeal.               
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2015

 State of Maharashtra V­  Pappu alias Asraji 
S/o Suresh Chavan 

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
Dated: December 02, 2016

Print Page