IMPORTANT POINTS
Deposit of cash, as a condition for granting anticipatory bail, is permissible in cases of cheating, financial frauds, white-collar crimes etc. But, the court has to take care that, the amount ordered to be deposited in such cases, is not highly excessive or onerous. The condition imposed shall be reasonable and it shall not amount to virtually denying the accused the benefit of bail.

1. Is it legal and proper to issue a direction for deposit of cash by a person, while exercising the power under Section 438(1) read with 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), as a condition for granting him the benefit of anticipatory bail? This question arises for consideration in these petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code.

2. The petitioner, in all these petitions, is one and the same person. She is accused of committing an offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. She is one of the accused in the four cases registered as Crime No.226/2019 of the Vallikunnam police station and Crime Nos.667/2019, 669/2019 and 670/2019 of the Kayamkulam police station under Section 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case against the petitioner is that she obtained huge amount of money from four persons for business purpose and also on the promise that she would arrange visa for their close relatives but she did not arrange any visa and that she also did not return the money and thereby committed the offence of cheating.

4. The petitioner filed four applications under Section 438 of the Code before the Court of Session, Alappuzha for granting anticipatory bail to her in the aforesaid four cases. The learned Sessions Judge, as per the common order dated 23.03.2019, allowed the applications on conditions. One of the conditions is that the petitioner shall, before execution of the bail bond, deposit Rs.25,000/-each in the four cases.

5. The petitioner filed applications before the Court of Session for deleting or modifying the condition regarding deposit of cash. The aforesaid applications were dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. The petitioner has approached this Court praying that, the direction issued by the learned Sessions Judge to deposit Rs.25,000/- each in the four cases, may be set aside.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no job or income and that she has got no funds with her to comply with the condition regarding deposit of cash. Learned counsel would contend that, the direction made by the learned Sessions Judge to deposit Rs.25,000/-each in the four cases, is illegal and at any rate, it amounts to an onerous and unreasonable condition.

8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the petitioner had obtained huge amount of money from four persons and misappropriated it and therefore, the learned Sessions Judge was perfectly justified in issuing a direction to her to deposit Rs.25,000/-each in the four cases, as a condition for granting her anticipatory bail.

9. Section 438(1) of the Code states that, where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under that section that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail. Section 438(2) of the Code states that when the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit.

10. While granting relief under Section 438(1) of the Code, the court is empowered to impose appropriate conditions. The object of imposing such conditions is to avoid the possibility of the person hampering the investigation of the case. Any condition, which has no reference to the fairness or propriety of the investigation or trial, cannot be countenanced as permissible under law. The discretion of the court, while imposing conditions, shall be exercised with utmost restraint. There is no absolute power conferred on a court to impose “any condition” that it chooses. Conditions imposed shall be reasonable and effective in the pragmatic sense. A condition imposed shall not defeat the order o