Supreme Court Criticizes 'Absurd, Impossible' Condition Imposed by Patna High Court for Bail

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India expressed strong disapproval over an 'absurd' bail condition imposed by the Patna High Court, where the accused was granted bail only on the condition that the victim of the offence would stand as his surety. This unusual stipulation led to the petitioner remaining in jail for nearly a year despite being granted bail.

Background

On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court's vacation bench, comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan, reviewed the peculiar bail condition set by the Patna High Court. The case involved an FIR filed on January 26, 2023, accusing the petitioner of the offence of procuration of a minor girl with common intention, under Section 366A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court's order dated July 25, 2023, had granted bail to the petitioner but with the stipulation that the victim of the alleged offence would need to act as the surety for the bail. This condition, deemed 'absurd' by the Supreme Court, resulted in the petitioner remaining incarcerated despite the bail order.

Supreme Court's Observations

During the hearing, the Supreme Court lamented the impracticality and unfairness of the condition. Justice Pardiwala commented, "It is very unfortunate to note that because of such absurd conditions imposed by the High Court, the petitioner, although ordered to be released on bail way back in July 2023, yet is still languishing in jail."

The petitioner had originally sought a modification of the bail condition, recognizing the impossibility of having the victim act as his surety. However, the Patna High Court rejected this request in its order dated January 12, 2024. The Supreme Court, taking cognizance of the unjust situation, issued a notice and stayed the High Court's bail conditions imposed in the July 25, 2023 order.

Legal Implications

This case underscores the critical role of higher judiciary in ensuring fair and reasonable conditions in bail orders. The Supreme Court's intervention highlights the need for judiciary prudence to avoid imposing conditions that are practically impossible and unjust, which can further exacerbate the plight of the accused awaiting trial.

By staying the High Court's condition, the Supreme Court has paved the way for a more equitable application of justice. The case also draws attention to the broader issue of bail conditions and the balance that must be maintained between ensuring the accused's presence in court and safeguarding their fundamental rights.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's decision to stay the Patna High Court's bail condition is a significant step towards ensuring judicial fairness and preventing the imposition of unreasonable and impractical conditions on bail. The case will be heard further after four weeks, offering an opportunity to revisit and rectify the bail conditions imposed, thus reinforcing the principles of justice and equity in the judicial process.

Case Details

• Case Name: Sharwan Kumar Yadav @ Sharwan Yadav v. State of Bihar

• Case Number: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No.27349/2024

The Supreme Court's decisive action in this matter serves as a crucial reminder of the judiciary's responsibility to uphold just and reasonable practices in bail proceedings, ensuring that the legal process does not become a source of further injustice for the accused.

Author : Shweta Sabuji