SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(SC) 1588

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.G. Balakrishnan, P.P. Naolekar, JJ.
B.P. Mohan Rao - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Karnataka & Anr. - Respondents
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).6353 of 2005
Decided On : 27-01-2006

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Rajappa, Adv., Mr. N.B. Joshi, Adv., Mr. H. Jairaman, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, Adv., Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Adv., Mr. Anil K. Mishra, Adv., Mr. A. Rohen Singh, Adv.

The Court balanced the interests of the parties and varied the bail condition based on the circumstances of the case, considering the Appellant's medical needs and the single complaint under Section 498A IPC.

Headnote:

Bail Conditions - Deposit of Money - Appellant - High Court of Karnataka - Temporary Leave - Maintenance - Section 498A IPC

Fact of the Case:

The Appellant, an Australian citizen, challenged an order by the High Court of Karnataka which permitted him to leave India for treatment in Australia, subject to the condition of depositing a sum of Rs.6 lacs. The Appellant's wife had filed a complaint against him under Section 498A IPC, and the trial Court had directed him to surrender his passport while on bail.

Finding of the Court:

The Court varied the condition, directing the Appellant to deposit Rs.3 lacs in the High Court registry instead of Rs.6 lacs, and execute a personal bond for Rs.5,00,000 with two solvent sureties. The Court also allowed the Appellant to withdraw the deposited amount and instructed him to return to India within four months of leaving the country.

Issues: Challenge to bail conditions, Appellant's need for treatment in Australia, maintenance for wife and daughter, interpretation of Section 498A IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court considered the single complaint under Section 498A IPC and the Appellant's need for medical treatment in Australia. It balanced the interests of the parties and varied the bail condition based on the circumstances of the case.

Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of with the Appellant being permitted to deposit Rs.3 lacs in the High Court registry, execute a personal bond, and allowed to withdraw the deposited amount for his treatment in Australia, with the condition to return to India within four months.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The Appellant has challenged an order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore.

4. The Appellant got married with the second Respondent. The second Respondent has filed a complaint against the Appellant under Section 498A IPC and the same is pending. During the pendency of the proceedings, the Appellant, who is an Australian citizen, submitted that he requires treatment at Australia. The trial Court while enlarging the Appellant on bail, directed him to surrender his passport so that he may not leave the country. Aggrieved, the Appellant approached the High Court. The High Court by the impugned order permitted the Appellant to leave India for a temporary period subject to certain conditions. The Appellant is aggrieved by third condition whereby he has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs.6 lacs.

5. The Appellant submitted before this Court that he is not a highly paid man and has to go to Australia for treatment and, therefore, he would not be in a position to deposit Rs.6 lacs. Counsel for the second Respondent submitted that the Appellant should deposit Rs.6 lacs and unless the amount is deposited he should not be allowed to leave India. It is submitted that the second Respondent has got a four years’ old daughter and the Appellant is not giving any maintenance either to the Respondent or to the daughter.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that there is only one complaint under Section 498A IPC and no other proceedings are pending before any Court, we vary condition No.3 of the impugned order and direct that the Appellant shall deposit Rs.3 lacs in the Registry of the High Court, instead of Rs.6 lacs. We also make it clear that the Appellant shall execute a personal bond for Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge. The Appellant shall come back to India within four months from the date on which he leaves India. The Appellant is permitted to withdraw Rs.3 lacs deposited in this Court and shall deposit the same in the High Court.

7. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top