IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.Karnik, J.
Rahul Ishwar Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Bail Application No. 237 of 2023
Decided On : 31-01-2023
Bail - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Ss. 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Sec. 34) - The court discussed the Consent Terms between the parties, compliance with the conditions of bail, and subsequent cancellation of bail. The legal provisions under the Indian Penal Code were central to the court's decision.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought bail in connection with a criminal case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. Bail was initially granted based on Consent Terms between the parties, but it was later cancelled due to non-compliance with the conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant failed to comply with the conditions of bail, leading to the cancellation of bail. However, the applicant later made substantial compliance with the conditions, leading to a grant of bail again.
Issues: Non-compliance with bail conditions, subsequent compliance, and the request for stay of the bail order were the key issues before the court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of complying with the conditions of bail and the seriousness of any breach of the affidavit-cum-undertaking.
Final Decision: The bail application was initially allowed, then cancelled, and finally granted again with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
2. This is an application for bail by the applicant-Rahul Ishwar Kapoor in connection with C.R. No.395 of 2017 registered with MIDC Police Station, Andheri for the offence punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter "the IPC", for short).
3. By an order dtd. 03/06/2019 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.291 of 2019 this Court enlarged the applicant on bail. The order dtd. 03/06/2019 reads thus :-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By these applications, the Applicants seek their enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No.395 of 2017 registered with the MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Counsel for the Applicants and the learned counsel for the added Respondent no.2 (original complainant) have tendered the Consent Terms dated 2 nd May, 2019, duly signed by the parties. The same are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. It appears from the Consent Terms that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and that the Applicants have handed over a flat ad-measuring 629 sq.ft on the 15thFloor of 'Meera Empire' Building, situated at Village Pahadi, Off. M.G. Road, Teen Dongri, Goregaon (West), Mumbai-400 104, to the Respondent No.2, as against part claim of a loan of Rs.1.00 crore taken from the complainant i.e. Respondent No.2. In addition to the said flat, the Applicants have also handed over a Fortuner Car which is presently in the custody of the police. The Applicants have also agreed to get the Fortuner Car released from the Court along with all necessary original documents, within one month of their release from jail. In addition to the aforesaid, to make up the amount of Rs.1.00 crore, the Applicants have also given two post-dated cheques for an amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs and Rs.4.00 lakhs respectively. The Applicants in the said Consent Terms have also agreed to honour the said cheques on or before 15 th June, 2019. Pursuant to the aforesaid, the added Respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant has given his No Objection for grant of bail to the Applicants. Learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that in the event the Applicants fail to comply with the undertaking, the Applicants bail be cancelled automatically. He also submits that the Applicants themselves will surrender, in the event they fail to comply with the Consent Terms. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 (original complainant) states that in the event the Consent Terms are complied with, the Respondent No.2 i.e. the original complainant will co- operate with the Applicants in filing of an appropriate Petition for quashing of the said case before the Division Bench.
4. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid Flat has been given by the Applicants to the original complainant and that there is a registered Agreement which has been entered into with respect to the said Flat. As far as the Fortuner Car and two postdated cheques are concerned, the Applicants have undertaken to hand over the Fortuner Car along with all necessary original documents, within one month of their release from jail to the Respondent No.2, as well as, have undertaken to honour the cheques on or before 15/6/2019.
5. Considering the Consent Terms entered into between the parties, without going into the merits, the applications are allowed and the applicants are enlarged on bail on the following terms and conditions:- ORDER i) The Applicants be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50, 000.00 each, with one or more sureties in the like amount;
ii) The Applicants shall abide by the Consent Terms entered into between them and the Respondent No.2 (original complainant);
iii) In the event, the Applicants fail to comply with the undertaking tendered today, the Applicants to surrender before the appropriate Court
AI
Compliance with bail conditions is crucial, and any breach of the conditions can lead to the cancellation of bail.
Violation of bail conditions, as evidenced by the accused's actions, warrants cancellation of the bail order.
Compliance with bail conditions and cooperation with investigating agency for recovery of amount due to the complainant.
Mere violation of bail condition is not sufficient to warrant cancellation of bail; a summary inquiry is necessary to determine the impact of the accused's involvement on the administration of justic....
Cancellation of bail requires cogent evidence of misuse or interference with justice, and mere non-payment of a disputed amount does not suffice.
Bail can be revoked if the accused fail to comply with the conditions of the compromise that justified its grant.
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.