IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
Lokesh Mahto @ Lokesh Ranjan Mahto – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr.M.P. No.2773 of 2020
Decided on : 26-02-2021
Modification - Criminal Revision - The court modified the original order to allow the petitioner to pay the fine amount and file a personal bond with two sureties within a further period of Eight Weeks from the date of the judgment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought modification of the judgment and order due to personal economic difficulties and complete lockdown declared due to COVID-19, which prevented compliance with the original order.
Finding of the Court:
The court modified the original order to grant the petitioner further time to pay the fine amount and file a personal bond with two sureties.
Issues: Modification of judgment and order due to personal economic difficulties and lockdown.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the petitioner's economic difficulties and the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown in granting the modification.
Final Decision: The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed and disposed of, with the petitioner directed to pay the fine amount and file a personal bond with two sureties within a further period of Eight Weeks from the date of the judgment.
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.
2. The instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been preferred by the petitioner for modification of the judgment and order dated 28.11.2019, passed in Cr. Revision No.600 of 2014, whereby petitioner was directed to be released under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act with condition that the petitioner shall file two sureties to the tune of Rs.25,000/-each coupled with personal bond to the effect that the petitioner shall not commit any offence and shall be of good behavior and shall maintain peace during the period of two years. If there is breach of any condition, he will subject himself to undergo sentence as directed by the learned trial court.
It was further ordered that the bond aforesaid be filed by the petitioner within three months from the date of the judgment. Further condition was that the petitioner shall also pay fine of Rs.3,000/-before the Secretary, DLSA, Saraikella within a period of three months from the date of the judgment or the petitioner shall serve SI for 3 months for non-compliance of the order of fine.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to personal economic difficulties of the petitioner and also due to complete lock down declared due to COVID 19; he could not deposit of Rs.3000/-as fine amount before the Secretary, DLSA, Saraikella and he also could not file the personal bond with two sureties to the tune of Rs.25,000/-before the trial court. In this view of the matter learned counsel for the petitioner prays for modification of the original order dated 28.11.2019 to the extent that the petitioner may be granted liberty to pay the aforesaid fine amount and also to file personal bail bond with two sureties to the tune of Rs.25000/-each within a further period of Eight Weeks from today.
4. Learned APP does not raise any serious objection.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and arguments adduced by the parties, the order dated 28.11.2019 passed in Cr. Revision No.600 of 2014 is hereby modified to the extent that the petitioner is directed to pay the fine amount of Rs.3,000/-before the Secretary, DLSA, Saraikella and to file personal bond with two sureties to the tune of Rs.25000/-each before the court concerned within a further period of Eight Weeks from today.
6. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be discharged from the liability of his bail bonds only on the fulfillment of the aforesaid conditions.
7. With the aforesaid modification in the order dated 28.11.2019, passed in Cr. Revision No.600 of 2014, the instant Cr.M.P. stands allowed and disposed of.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court concerned through “FAX” at the cost of the Petitioner.
The court has the discretion to modify a judgment and order based on the petitioner's circumstances, such as economic difficulties and external factors like a lockdown.
The court has the discretion to modify a judgment and order in consideration of exceptional circumstances, such as those arising from a lockdown.
The court held that bail conditions must be reasonable, considering the petitioner's financial status and circumstances.
High Court modified excessive bail surety from Rs.20 lakhs to Rs.5 lakhs under BNSS for proportionality.
Court modified NDPS bail conditions to personal bond with sureties due to petitioner's inability to secure solvent sureties.
The court may modify bail conditions based on humanitarian considerations, such as the poor financial condition of the appellant's family.
Bail amounts should depend on the accused's financial circumstances, prioritizing personal bonds over sureties to prevent undue hardship.
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.