2024 (10) TMI 1163 - HC - GST

Imposition of a condition of furnishing a bank guarantee while granting bail - Seeking modification of the order under Section 439(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. - misappropriation of funds of the organization and also thieved certain documents - whether the Court would have imposed a condition of furnishing of bank guarantee of whatever amount it is, while granting bail? - HELD THAT - The Apex Court answering an identical circumstance has held that asking for a bank guarantee or a condition of furnishing a bank guarantee, while granting bail, is illegal. The Apex Court in the case of Subhash Chouhan v. Union of India and another 2023 (1) TMI 1168 - SC ORDER has held ' the condition directing the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs. 70 Lakhs is not liable to be sustained and is hereby set aside.' The Apex Court has held it to be illegal in the afore-quoted judgment. The said finding would become applicable to the facts of the case at hand and the condition of furnishing of bank guarantee is on the face of it illegal. This Court is coming across plethora of cases where the concerned Courts, while granting bail are imposing a condition that the accused should furnish a bank guarantee of any quantum. This is on the face of it illegal. Such orders being passed have generated lot of litigation. It is deemed appropriate to observe that the concerned Court shall not insist on furnishing of bank guarantee for release of the accused on grant of bail. Except this, the concerned Court would be free to impose any other legally tenable conditions - the criminal petition is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of a condition of furnishing a bank guarantee while granting bail.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Imposition of a condition of furnishing a bank guarantee while granting bail

The petitioner challenged the order directing the furnishing of a bank guarantee of a specified amount as a condition for bail. The Court referred to several judgments by the Apex Court, including Subhash Chouhan v. Union of India, Anatbhai Ashokbhai Shah v. State of Gujarat, Makhijani Pushpak Harish v. State of Gujarat, and Karandeep Singh v. CBI. These judgments established that imposing a bank guarantee as a condition for bail is illegal. The Court reiterated that such conditions are not sustainable and should be set aside. The Court held that while other conditions of bail may remain intact, the direction to furnish a bank guarantee is illegal. The petitioner had already furnished a bail bond and surety as per the original order. The Court emphasized that the concerned Court should not insist on a bank guarantee for the release of the accused on bail, as it is illegal. The Court allowed the petition, set aside the order directing the bank guarantee, and maintained the other conditions of bail.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issue of imposing a bank guarantee as a condition for bail, citing relevant Apex Court judgments that deemed such conditions illegal. The Court set aside the order directing the furnishing of a bank guarantee, emphasizing that the concerned Court should not insist on such guarantees for bail release. The petitioner's application was allowed, and the other conditions of bail remained intact, except for the illegal bank guarantee requirement.