LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

conditions while granting bail

(Querist) 29 June 2009 This query is : Resolved 
Whether the court is empowered to impose any conditions other than enumerated u/s 437 Cr.P.C. while granting bail?
I hope there is a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard, but however I am unable to find the same at present. Please help me.
A V Vishal (Expert) 29 June 2009
Dear Mr Gupta

The scope of s.437 is wide, the court may impose conditions other than emunerated which are in consonance with s.437 while granting bail. However, what conditions are imposed is not stated in your query.
Legal Fighter (Expert) 30 June 2009
the court can't impose unreasonable conditions while granting bail. below is one recent judgment from Supreme Court.



CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 344 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.
637 of 2008) Munish Bhasin & Ors. ... Appellants Versus

State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr. ... Respondents JUDGMENT


Leave granted. The complainant (wife of first appellant) to whom notice was
ordered on 25.01.2008 is impleaded as second respondent.

2. Heard Counsel.


3. The appellant (accused no. 1) assails the condition imposed by the High
Court requiring him to pay a sum of Rs.12,500/- as maintenance to his wife and
child while granting anticipatory bail to him and his parents with reference
to the complaint filed by his wife for alleged commission of offences
punishable under Sections 498A and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

4. The marriage of the appellant was solemnized with Ms. Renuka on December 05,
2004. She has filed a complaint in November 2006, against the appellant and
his parents for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A
and 406 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code on the grounds that after
marriage she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty for bringing less
dowry and that her stri-dhan entrusted to them has been dishonestly
misappropriated by them.


5. Apprehending arrest, the appellant and his parents moved High Court of Delhi
for anticipatory bail. The application came up for consideration before a
Learned Single Judge of the High Court on 22.02.2007. The Learned Additional
Public Prosecutor accepted notice and submitted that the matter was essentially
a matrimonial dispute and therefore the parties should be referred to the
Mediation and Conciliation Cell of the Delhi High Court. The Learned Judge
agreed with the suggestion made by the Additional Public Prosecutor and
directed the parties to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Cell of
the Delhi High Court on March 02, 2007. The case was ordered to be listed on
10.05.2007. The Learned Judge further directed that in the event of arrest of
the appellant and his parents, before the next date of hearing, they shall be
released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-
each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating
Officer/ Arresting Officer concerned, subject however, to the condition that
the appellant and 4

his parents shall surrender their passports to the Investigating Officer and
shall file affidavits in the Court that they would not leave the country
without prior permission of the Court.

6. From the records, it appears that the conciliation proceedings failed and
therefore the bail application was taken up for hearing on merits. On
representation made by the wife of the appellant, the counsel of the appellant
was directed to produce appellant's salary slip. Accordingly, the salary slip
of the appellant was produced before the Court which indicated that the
appellant was drawing gross salary of Rs.41,598/- and after deductions of
advance tax etc., his net salary was Rs.33,000/-. The Learned Single Judge of
the High Court took the notice of the fact that the appellant had the duty to
maintain his wife and the child and therefore as a condition for grant of
anticipatory bail, directed the appellant, by the order dated 07.08.2007 to pay
a sum of Rs.12,500/- per month by way of maintenance to his 5

wife and child. The Learned Single Judge also directed to pay arrears at the
rate of Rs. 12,500/- per month from August 2005, that is Rs. 3,00,000/- within
six months. The imposition of these conditions for gr
PARTHA P BORBORA (Expert) 30 June 2009
a magistrate can ompose any other comditions also.
I do agree with the views of my all ld. friends.
Kiran Kumar (Expert) 30 June 2009
pls refer to

Gurbaksh Singh Sibia v/s State of Punjab

AIR 1980 SC 1632

hopefully all doubts will be cleared.
KANDE VENKATESH GUPTA (Querist) 01 July 2009
Thanks Mr.Manish and Mr.Kiran for your valuable help and timely response

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now

Similar Resolved Queries :