Conditions on bail that undermine an accused's fundamental rights must be avoided.

O R D E R

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2026 Aggrieved by the judgment passed in C.C.No.55/2014, on the file of the Court of the Special Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, convicting and sentencing the petitioners, who are the accused 7 to 9 in the above case, to pay a fine of Rs.1,08,000/- and undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year, the petitioners have preferred Crl.Appeal No.258/2025 before the Court of Session, Thrissur (‘Appellate Court’, in short). Along with the appeal, the petitioners also filed an application to suspend the substantive sentence and the sentence of fine. However, by the impugned Annexure-1 order, the Appellate Court has conditionally suspended the sentence by directing the petitioners to remit 20% of the fine amount within one month. The impugned direction is onerous and unjustifiable. There is no provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (‘ BNSS ’, in short) that mandates the accused persons to deposit the fine/compensation amount for the purpose of suspending the sentence, unlike an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners have raised valid grounds in the appeal and have been advised that there is every likelihood of the appeal being allowed in their favour. The condition to deposit the fine amount is unwarranted, and therefore, may be set aside.

2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. Indisputably, the petitioners have been convicted for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 4 06 , 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B read with Section 3 4 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 , 4, 5 and 6 of the of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act , 1978.

4. The learned Sessions Judge, on considering the nature, gravity and financial implications of the offences, has directed the petitioners to deposit 20% of the total fine amount within one month. Going by the provisions under the BNSS , I do not find that there is any mandatory stipulation that 20% of the fine amount has to be deposited unlike Section 148 of the N.I.Act, especially in a statutory appeal filed before the Appellate Court under Section 4 15 (3) of the . However, it is the discretion of the Appellate Court to impose such conditions as it may deem fit.

5. Recently, in Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ashok Sirpal [2024 KHC 6592], the Honourable Supreme Court has held that conditions that defeat the right of an appellant-accused to be enlarged on bail shall be avoided because it violates his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, I am of the definite view that the condition in Annexure-1 order, directing the petitioners to deposit 20%

of the fine amount, is onerous.

In the aforesaid circumstance, I allow the Crl.M.C.

by setting aside the condition in Annexure-1 order, ordering the petitioners to deposit 20% of the fine amount within one month. However, the petitioners shall execute bond for Rs.75,000/- each with two solvent sureties as ordered in Annexure-1 order.

Sd/-