Aastha Thakur
Published on: 4 October 2022 at 23:54 IST
The Jharkhand High Court’s requirement that applicants for pre-arrest bail pay 7.5 lakhs as “victim compensation” in order to be granted bail was recently overturned by the Supreme Court of India on the grounds that such requests are not the same as petitions for money recovery procedures.
The division bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Bela M Trivedi observed that, “Even if we take the submissions of the learned counsel for the contesting respondent on its face value, we are clearly of the view that in essence, the petitions seeking relief of pre arrest bail are not money recovery proceedings..”
“…ordinarily, there is no justification for adopting such a course that for the purpose of being given the concession of pre-arrest bail, the person concerned apprehending arrest has to make payment.”
The bench was hearing the appeal petition filed against the order of the Jharkhand HC allowing Pre-arrest bail to the appellants on basis of bond surety of ₹ 25,000/- and submit a demand draft ₹ 7,50,000/- as an ad-interim victim compensation.
The representative of appellant No. 2 has submitted in its plea that the expression “victim compensation” as used in alleged order may not be appropriate as it was not a case of recovery of victim compensation.
But the condition cannot be said to be justified or Onerous because receiving of the said sum of ₹ 7,50,000/- by the appellants at the time of marriage has not been a fact in dispute.
However, the counsel appearing for the State Government cited on several orders against imposing the terms of payment for the purpose of granting the relief of Pre-arrest bail and remitting the matter for re-consideration.
The court after hearing both counsels modified the order of the High Court without sending it back to the High Court in the present matter.
“Having regard to the circumstances, in our view, the said condition of depositing a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- for the purpose of granting the relief of pre-arrest bail cannot be approved and else, the order granting bail deserves to be maintained.”
“Hence, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served by sending the matter for reconsideration to the High Court and the order impugned deserves to be modified appropriately in these appeals only.”
The apex court explained that the order is revised in the manner-releasing the appellants on bail in the event of arrest in furnishing bond surety of Rs. 25,000/- will remain intact but the other part of the order, about submission of amount ₹ 7,50,000/- has been overturned.
With stating these observations, the Court disposed the plea.