LI Network
Published on: 20 August 2023 at 23:48 IST
The Supreme Court of India has taken up the pivotal question of whether a bail condition mandating assurance from the embassy or high commission of a foreign national accused of a crime can be legally imposed.
The Court’s examination of this issue comes in response to a case involving a foreign national who challenged certain bail conditions set by the Delhi High Court.
These conditions included a requirement for assurance from the Nigerian High Commission that the accused would not leave India while facing charges under the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
A division bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol has been tasked with hearing the challenge. The matter revolves around the issue of ensuring a fair trial while respecting the rights of foreign nationals.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on this issue will likely have far-reaching implications for the bail conditions imposed on foreign nationals facing legal proceedings in India.
The Court’s attention was drawn to a provision that was included in the directions issued by the Supreme Court in its 1994 judgment in the case of “Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee vs. Union Of India.”
This provision, referred to as Clause (iv), requires that in the case of foreign undertrial accused, the Special Judge must obtain a certificate of assurance from the embassy or high commission of the accused’s country of origin. This certificate is meant to guarantee that the accused will not leave the country and will appear before the Special Court when required.
In the present case, the Supreme Court has questioned the practicality and feasibility of obtaining such assurances from foreign embassies and high commissions.
The Court raised concerns about the Embassies/High Commissions’ ability to give the assurances specified in Clause (iv) and considered whether it would be fair to deny bail if such an assurance could not be obtained.
The Court has also directed the Centre to provide information on whether there have been instances where the Indian Embassy or High Commission provided assurances for an Indian citizen facing prosecution in a foreign country.
Additionally, the Supreme Court is set to examine another bail condition that requires the accused to share their PIN location on Google Maps with the investigating officer.
The Court has appointed Senior Advocate Vinay Navare as an amicus curiae to assist in this matter.
The technical aspects and implications of this condition will be elaborated upon in an affidavit filed by an expert in the field.
The case has been scheduled for further consideration on October 13th. It is worth noting that the same division bench is concurrently addressing a similar question regarding the sharing of live location as a bail condition in a different case involving the Enforcement Directorate.