Excessive bail conditions may infringe on the fundamental right to liberty, necessitating a balance with attending trial requirements.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner primarily seeks for a direction to permit him to execute a single bond for all crimes registered in the State of Kerala in which he has been granted bail. Though the petitioner has also sought for a direction to record his arrest, in crimes already registered, within a time period to be fixed, the said relief was not pressed during the course of arguments.

2. Petitioner is the accused in more than 1200 cases, all registered in different Police Stations spread over the entire State. He has been granted bail in 738 cases in which his arrest was recorded. Despite bail having been granted by this Court, petitioner is aggrieved by the conditions imposed in all the bail orders which mandates execution of a bail bond with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the Court having jurisdiction. According to the petitioner, the said condition has turned out to be too onerous for compliance and he continues to be in custody. 3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the Investigating Officer wherein it is pointed out that a total of 1343 cases have been registered against the petitioner, at various Police Stations all over Kerala, out of which, 1297 cases have been transferred to the Crime Branch for investigation. It is also stated that the first case registered in respect of the scam allegedly committed by the accused was within the jurisdiction of Muvattupuzha Police Station as Crime No.119 of 2025. The complainant in that crime alleged that the accused had committed criminal breach of trust on the members of a society called Socio- Economic Environmental Development Society (for short 'SEED') by promising to deliver various articles at half the price, by utilising CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) funds and funds from various Non Governmental Organisations. It was further stated that petitioner is the second accused in that crime and he is alleged to have incorporated a condition in the Trust Deed regarding the concept of CSR funds. The statement of the fourth respondent also indicates that the petitioner was arrested on 11.02.2025 and he has been continuing as a remand prisoner at the Central Prison and he has been arrayed as one of the accused in all cases registered all over the State. The fourth respondent also plead that the bail bonds are executed for ensuring the presence of the accused for the purpose of investigation and trial and if the reliefs sought for by the petitioner is granted, it may not be possible to take any remedial measures by forfeiting the bonds, unless it is executed before the appropriate jurisdictional Court.

4. I have heard Sri.S.Rajeev, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Special Government Pleader.

5. As noted in the introductory paragraph, the learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset itself submitted that he is not pressing relief No.1 in the writ petition and confined his prayer only to relief No.2 in the writ petition.

6. The petitioner has been granted bail in numerous cases. Ext.P3 is the order dated 23.06.2025 in B.A. No.7630 of 2025. Despite bail having been granted in similar matters as well and no further cases remain where bail has not been granted, petitioner continues to remain in custody for the failure to arrange the sureties and execute bail bonds. In most of the orders granting bail, this Court has permitted the same sureties to stand as security on behalf of the petitioner. It is despite the said direction that the petition