1. Arrest for offences under CGST Act — Bail application under Section 437, CrPC — Imposition of bank guarantee as a condition for bail. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2023 Supreme(SC) 520
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KRISHNA MURARI, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, JJ.
Makhijani Pushpak Harish – Appellant
Versus
The State of Gujarat – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1193 of 2023, SLP (Crl.) No. 2868 of 2023
Decided On : 19-04-2023
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Bail – Imposition of condition for deposit of bank guarantee as a pre-deposit for bail is not proper.
Bail – Imposition of condition for deposit of bank guarantee as a pre-deposit for bail is not proper.
Subject
Bail - Pre-Deposit Condition
Act Referred
Headnote
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 437 and 439 – Grant of bail – Imposition of condition for deposit of bank guarantee as a pre-deposit for bail – Such a condition cannot be imposed while granting bail – Pre-condition of furnishing bank guarantee imposed by High Court is not liable to be sustained and hereby set aside – Rest of conditions imposed for grant of bail by Chief Judicial Magistrate and upheld by High Court sustained. (Paras 8, 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
On being arrested on the basis of complaint filed by Superintendent(Prevention) of Central GST and Central Excise, Vadodara, for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 132(1)(a) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, appellant made application under Section 437 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for seeking bail before Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara.
Findings of Court:
Same view has been reaffirmed by this Court in another similar case, Criminal Appeal No. 523/2023, Anatbhai Ashokbhai Shah Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. Vide judgment and order dated 17th February, 2023.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Bharat Rai Chandani, Deepak Kumar Khokhar, Aneesh Mittal, Sonia Abrol.
For the Respondents: Deepanwita Priyanka, Swati Ghildiyal, Devyani Bhatt.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Bharat Rai Chandani, Deepak Kumar Khokhar, Aneesh Mittal, Sonia Abrol.
For the Respondents: Deepanwita Priyanka, Swati Ghildiyal, Devyani Bhatt.
Table of Contents
2. Challenge to the legality of imposing a bank guarantee or pre-deposit as a condition for the grant of bail. (Para 5 )
3. Pre-conditions for deposit or bank guarantees for bail are unsustainable, as affirmed in previous rulings and conceded by the Union of India. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
4. A condition requiring a pre-deposit or the furnishing of a bank guarantee cannot be imposed as a prerequisite for granting bail. (Para 6 , 11 )
5. Condition for furnishing bank guarantee set aside — Other bail conditions sustained — Appeal allowed and release directed. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 )
6. Can a court impose a bank guarantee or pre-deposit as a condition for granting bail?
No, the court held that such pre-conditions of deposit or furnishing a bank guarantee are not sustainable and cannot be imposed while granting bail. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 )
7. Does the setting aside of a financial condition for bail affect other non-financial conditions imposed by the court?
No, the court clarified that while the pre-condition of furnishing a bank guarantee is set aside, other conditions imposed for the grant of bail are sustained. (Para 12 )
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. On being arrested on the basis of complaint filed by the Superintendent (Prevention) of Central GST and Central Excise, Vadodara, for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 132(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for short ‘CGST’) the appellant made an application under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for seeking bail before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara.
4. The bail was granted subject to the condition that the appellant submits a bank guarantee of an amount of Rs. 3 crores along with certain other conditions.
5. Aggrieved by the imposition of condition for deposit of bank guarantee, as a pre-deposit for a bail, the appellant approached the High Court by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 710 of 2023 which came to be disposed of by the order dated 12.01.2023 impugned herein, whereby the High Court modified the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of an amount of Rs. 3 crore by reducing it to Rs. 1.5 crore.
6. Such pre-condition of deposit of an amount or furnishing a bank guarantee has been the subject matter of consideration by this Court in a number of cases, where condition of pre-deposit has been held to be bad.
7. Reference may be made to an identical matter in Criminal Appeal No. 186/2023, Subhash Chouhan vs. Union of India, this Court vide Judgment dated 20.01.2023 set aside the order passed by the High Court imposing a condition of deposit while granting bail to the appellant therein.
8. It is also pertinent to note that in the said case, the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India/State had fairly stated that such a condition cannot be imposed while granting bail. The statement made by the learned Additional Solicitor General is recorded in the judgment and order dated 20.01.2023.
9. The same view has been reaffirmed by this Court in another similar case, Criminal Appeal No. 523/2023, Anatbhai Ashokbhai Shah vs. State of Gujarat and Others vide judgment and order dated 17th February, 2023.
10. Facts of the present case being identical to the facts of the aforesaid two Criminal appeals, we see no reason to deviate from the view taken in the aforesaid two cases.
11. Following the reasons given in the aforesaid judgments and orders, we are of the considered opinion that pre-condition of furnishing bank guarantee imposed by the High Court is not liable to be sustained and is hereby set aside.
12. The rest of the conditions imposed for grant of bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and upheld by the High Court are hereby sustained.
13. Accordingly, it is directed let the applicant be released on bail. The appeal, accordingly, stands allowed.
14. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
