Supreme Court: Participation in protest and expression of strong views is not violation of bail conditions-bail is not liable to be cancelled on that ground

As far as the first FIR is concerned, it is about

participation in a protest on 6th December, 2022 for

making a grievance about the demolition of Babri Masjid.

The second FIR relates to an allegation that the

appellant and others spoke furiously and demanded release

of certain persons in custody. We do not think that only

by expressing his strong views about the demolition of

the masjid and by demanding release of prisoners, it can

be said that the appellant has misused the liberty

granted to him under the order dated 25th July, 2022.

Even otherwise, we are of the view that the grounds

mentioned in the impugned order cannot constitute grounds

for cancellation of bail. Strong criticism of the

Hon'ble Chief Minister is not a violation of bail order.

Therefore, we set aside the impugned order dated 7th June,

2022 and restore the order of the High Court dated 6th

August, 2021.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1994 OF 2024

A.DURAIMURUGAN PANDIYAN SATTAI @ DURAIMURUGAN  VS. STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

Dated: April 08, 2024.

Print Page

Whether the court can impose bail condition for an offence U/S 498A of IPC that husband Should Resume Conjugal Life With Wife?

Vide the said order dated 10.08.2021, the

High Court had allowed the A.B.A. No.2025 of 2021 on the

condition that the appellant shall take the respondent No.2

(wife) to his house at Pandra locality of Ranchi and maintain

her with full dignity and honour as his lawful wife.

5. The High Court vide the impugned order has dismissed the

Cr.M.P. No.2419 of 2021 filed by the appellant observing that

in view of the adamant attitude of the appellant in not

resuming the conjugal life with the opposite party No.2 in the

house of the appellant, where the opposite party No.2 was

staying, his petition could not be considered. In our opinion,

neither such condition should have been imposed by the High

Court while granting an anticipatory bail, nor such could be a

ground for rejection of the petition filed by the appellant.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.3701 OF 2023

KUNAL CHOUDHARY  Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND .

Dated: DECEMBER 05, 2023.

Print Page

Supreme Court: The Court should not direct accused to furnish bank guarantee as condition for releasing him on bail

Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on a judgment

of a Co-ordinate Bench delivered in Criminal Appeal No. 1193 of

2023 (Makhijani Pushpak Harish Vs.The State of Gujarat) in which

such a pre-condition of furnishing Bank Guarantee was held to be unsustainable. In that judgment, reference was made to an

earlier decision of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 186/2023

(Subhash Chouhan Vs. Union of India) delivered on 20.01.2023.

In the light of the legal position explained in the aforesaid

judgment of the co-ordinate Bench, we direct that the appellant

shall not be required to comply with condition (1) contained in

the orders of the High Court dated 22.03.2023 and 28.03.2023.

Instead of the requirement of furnishing Bank Guarantee, we

direct that the appellant shall furnish a bail bond for Rs. five

lakhs in each of the two orders for bail, under appeal before

us. Rest of the conditions contained in the orders impugned

shall remain and would have to be complied with by the appellant  for being enlarged on bail.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1711-1712 OF 2023

KARANDEEP SINGH  Vs  CBI 

Dated: JUNE 09, 2023.

Print Page

Can the court direct the accused to cancel the registered sale deed executed in favour of a third party as a condition for grant of Anticipatory bail?

 The main grievance of the petitioner in this Special Leave

Petition is that the High Court while allowing an application filed by him under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 granting anticipatory bail, directed the Petitioner to comply with the Condition No.(iii) with regard to cancellation of the registered sale deed executed by him and return the money received from the complainant. The said condition is reproduced below:(

iii) “The petitioner/accused shall cooperate in the

investigation and shall furnish all the registered

documents before the investigating authorities and he

shall take steps to cancel the registered sale deeds

executed in favour of the vendees within two months from

today, and shall also return the consideration amount

received through the said registered sale deeds within two

months from today, failing which, liberty granted to the

petitioner shall stand cancelled automatically and he

shall be taken into custody forthwith.”

We are, prima facie, of the considered view that the High

Court ought not to have imposed the said Condition No.(iii), while granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would

tantamount to adversely affect the rights of the parties to the

registered documents, which can be adjudicated upon by a Civil

Court only.

In addition to the above, in our opinion, a registered sale

deed cannot be cancelled unilaterally by one party to the said

document in purported compliance of the direction given by the High Court and thereby adversely affecting the rights of the purchasers, who are not a party before the High Court.

In view of the above, in our considered opinion, ends of

justice would be met if the said condition is deleted from the

impugned order.

Accordingly, we delete the said condition.

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

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5543/2021

SYED AFSAR PASHA QUADRI  Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA 

Date : 17-09-2021

Print Page

Whether accused can be released on bail conditional upon heavy deposits?

If the petitioner lacks funds, undertaking
ought not to have been given to the Court. Be
that as it may, it is well settled that bail
cannot be made conditional upon heavy deposits
beyond the financial capacity of an applicant for
bail.

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).5195-5196/2019

M.D. DHANAPAL Vs STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE 
Date : 11-06-2019 
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
(VACATION BENCH)

Print Page

Whether imposing high cash security as bail condition virtually amounts to denial of bail itself?

The condition imposed by the High Court for enlarging Keshab Narayan Banerjee, appellant No. 1 on bail, namely, that he should furnish security for rupees one lakh in cash or in fixed deposit of any nationalised bank in Bihar with two sureties residing in the State of Bihar each for a like amount appears to be excessively onerous. In the circumstances of this case, it virtually amounts to denial of bail itself. It is, therefore, ordered that appellant No. 1 shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a bail bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge.

Supreme Court of India

Keshab Narayan Banerjee And Anr. vs The State Of Bihar on 11 July, 1984

Equivalent citations: AIR 1985 SC 1666, 1985 CriLJ 1857

Author: E Venkataramiah J

Print Page

Whether bail granted to accused can be automatically cancelled if he fails to remain present in police station as per bail condition?

Further, there is no automatic cancellation of bail.  Granting bail
is different from cancelling the bail.  Because both are based on different
grounds.  Even if an accused, who has been directed to appear before the
police station or Court,  as part of bail condition by the fact that he has
absented, he cannot be fault with.  Because there may be so many reasons for
the accused that there might have some melancholy in his family or he might
have fell sick or he might have been arrested in some other case or even due
to poverty he has no money in his hand that has prevented him to go to the
police station or even the defacto complainant or his opponent preventing him
from obeying the bail condition by engaging some hooligans so that the bail
conditions may not be observed and a bail can be cancelled.
        
        6. Therefore, some opportunity should have been given before cancelling
the bail order.  Cancellation of bail order is a serious one.  It is in the
nature of withdrawing the liberty already given to a person.  Principles of
natural justice is very important.  It is not found in any statute, but it is
found in the heart of every humanbeing.  Judges are not exception to this.
In this respect the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai seems to have
passed order mechanically.  He acted as motionless machine.   No highly
developed computer can replace a judge.  Because the inanimate computer has  
no feeling or sense. 
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 13.06.2016  

CORAM   
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS            

C.R.L.RC(MD) Nos.253 of 2016 & 254 of 2016  
and 
CRL MP(MD)No.3337 & 3338 of 2016    


1. Uma Maheshwari                               ... Petitioner  in Crl.RC.253/2016
2. R.Hariharan                                  ... Petitioner  in Crl.RC.254/2016

-vs-

The State Rep.by 
The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Madurai                                                    ... Respondent in both Crl.RCs.

Print Page