Back
2022 Supreme(SC) 1718
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ajay Rastogi, C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.
Divya Bharti – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8498 of 2022 (Arising Out of Impugned Final Judgment and Order Dated 11-05-2022 in Crm No. 14853 of 2021 Passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna)
Decided On : 14-11-2022
Mr. Binay Kumar Das, Advocate, Ms. Priyanka Das, Advocate, Ms. Neha Das, Advocate, Mr. Ajai Kumar, Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate, For the Respondent.
The court emphasized that onerous conditions, such as requiring the return of salary drawn, should not be imposed for the grant of pre-arrest bail.
Headnote:
Bail Conditions - Panchayat Teacher - The court set aside the onerous condition imposed by the High Court requiring the petitioner to return the entire amount drawn as salary in equal installments as a condition for granting pre-arrest bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Panchayat Teacher, was granted pre-arrest bail by the High Court on the condition that she return the entire amount drawn as salary in equal installments. The petitioner challenged the onerous condition imposed by the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the additional condition of returning the salary drawn by the petitioner as a Panchayat Teacher was neither justified nor required under the law for the grant of pre-arrest bail.
Issues: The issue was whether the High Court was justified in imposing the condition for the petitioner to return the salary drawn as a Panchayat Teacher as a condition for granting pre-arrest bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the additional condition imposed by the High Court was not legally sustainable and accordingly set it aside.
Final Decision: The court set aside the additional condition imposed by the High Court and disposed of the special leave petition.
ORDER
1. The present petition has been filed assailing the conditions which were imposed by the High Court while granting her anticipatory bail by an order dated 11.05.2022. It reveals from the record that the petitioner was appointed as a Panchayat Teacher and while in service an FIR No. 125/2020 dated 17.06.2020 came to be registered against her for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC.
2. At this stage when she approached the Sessions Court in the first instance seeking pre-arrest bail that came to be rejected by an order dated 16.10.2020 and the High Court although granted her pre-arrest bail by an order dated 11.05.2022 on the condition that she will return the salary which she has received while working as a Panchayat Teacher. The extract of the condition imposed by the High Court while granting her pre-arrest bail reads as under:
'Further condition is that the petitioner shall return the entire amount drawn by her as salary in eighteen equal monthly installments and she shall not claim for her appointment as Panchayat Teacher.'
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whether the petitioner was entitled for pre-arrest bail or post-arrest bail depends upon the facts and circumstances of the case but at the given point of time the High Court was not justified in putting such onerous conditions by calling upon her to return the salary which she has received in equal installments which is neither contemplated under the Code nor it can be made a condition for the purpose of seeking bail and this Court has come forward to question such onerous conditions being put by the High Court while granting pre-arrest/post-arrest bail to the applicant.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the material on record, we are of the view that the additional condition of returning the amount drawn by her as salary on appointment as Panchayat Teacher is neither justified nor required under the law while grant of pre-arrest bail to her.
5. Consequently, the additional condition, indicated above, imposed by the High Court under order impugned dated 11.05.2022 is not legally sustainable and accordingly set aside.
6. With this clarification, the special leave petition stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
