B.P.SINGH, ARUN KUMAR
Geetha – Appellant
Versus
State of T. N. – Respondent
ORDER :
Arun Kumar, J.
Special leave granted.
2. We have heard counsel for the parties.
3. Application for intervention is allowed.
4. The High Court, by its impugned order, has directed the release of the appellants on bail imposing certain conditions including the condition that the appellants shall pay a sum of Rs 5 lakhs to the complainant in accordance with the time-schedule fixed by the Court.
5. Counsel for the appellants submits that such conditions cannot be imposed while granting bail because the High Court has proceeded on the basis that the case of the respondent complainant is true. It is brought to our notice by counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent that the Court was led to pass the aforesaid order on the basis of certain averments made by the appellants in their affidavit filed before the Court.
6. Rather than going into these questions, we set aside the order of the High Court and direct the High Court to consider the matter afresh for grant of bail to the appellants. It may pass such order as it may think proper in the facts and circumstances of the case but shall not impose a condition for payment of Rs 5 lakhs as imposed under the order impugned.
7. This appeal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.