Bail conditions imposed by courts must not be onerous, particularly those restricting the choice of sureties to close relatives, as such requirements infringe upon the liberty of the accused and hinder the ability to secure bail.

COMMON ORDER

As these criminal miscellaneous cases arise out of the same crime, they are consolidated, jointly heard and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No.213/2026 registered by the Feroke Police Station, Kozhikode, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (‘NDPS Act’, in short).

3. The petitioners have stated in the criminal miscellaneous cases that they were arrested on 31.03.2026 and remanded to judicial custody. By Annexure-1 order, the Court of the Special Judge (NDPS Act Cases), Vatakara, (‘Trial Court’, in short) enlarged the petitioners on bail subject to conditions. As per Condition No.(2) in Annexure 1 order, the above Court has directed the petitioners to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- each with two solvent sureties of whom one of the sureties should be a close relative of the petitioners. Condition No. (2) in Annexure -1 order is onerous and unjustifiable.

Hence, the Crl.M.C.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Moti Ram and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1978 SC 1594] has categorically held that the bail Court shall not impose onerous conditions particularly that the sureties should hail from a particular State or should be near relatives. The above view has been reiterated by this Court in Subho Adhikari v. State Of Kerala [2018 (4) KLT

778].

4. Considering the above exposition of law and the fact that the above Court has already enlarged the petitioners on bail, I find that the condition that one of the sureties should be a close relative of the petitioners is onerous and unwarranted. Thus, I am satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent powers of this Court under Section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow the Crl.M.Cs by deleting condition No.(2) in Annexure 1 order in both the cases. It would be up to the petitioners to furnish two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the Trial Court as ordered in condition No.(1) in Annexure 1 order and execute the bail, and comply with the other conditions.