Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 65125
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S. Dias, J
Mansoor M.P – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 8302 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Mohamed Sabah, Libin Stanley, Saipooja, Sadik Ismayil, T.I. Safdarshah, R. Gayathri, M. Mahin Hamza, Alwin Joseph, Benson Ambrose
For the Respondents: Devadas H. Mallan
Bail conditions must not be onerous; specifically, requiring a surety to be a close relative is unwarranted and can be modified by the High Court exercising its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Headnote:(A) Bail Conditions - Onerous Requirements - The condition requiring a surety to be a close relative is considered onerous and unjustifiable; bail courts should not impose conditions that restrict sureties to specific relationships or states. (Para 4)
(B) Inherent Powers of High Court - Modification of Bail Conditions - The High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to delete or modify onerous conditions imposed by a bail court to ensure the right to bail is not rendered illusory. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the condition requiring one of the sureties to be a close relative is onerous and can be deleted by the High Court.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
crime and sentencing
-
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act
- offences under section 22(b)
-
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act
-
practice and procedure
-
bail
- bail conditions
- surety
-
inherent powers
- section 528 of the bharatiya nagarik suraksha sanhita 2023
-
bail
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.09.2026 IN CRMP NO.2 OF 2026 OF SPECIAL COURT (NDPS ACT CASES), VADAKARA
OTHER PRESENT: PP.SRI.DEVADAS H. MALLAN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.S.DIAS, J.---------------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.8302 of 2026 -----------------------------------------------Dated this the 1st day of October, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.584/2026 registered by the Thaliparamba Police Station, Kannur, alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘Act’, for short).
It is the petitioner’s case that, by Annexure -1 order, the Court of the Special Judge (NDPS Act Cases) Vatakara (‘Bail Court’) had enlarged the petitioner on bail subject to conditions. As per condition No.(1) the petitioner has been directed to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, of which one of the sureties should be a close relative of the petitioner. The said condition is onerous and unjustifiable. Hence, this petition.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
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].
Considering the above exposition of law and the fact that the above Court has already enlarged the petitioner on bail, I find that the condition that one of the sureties should be a close relative of the petitioner 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.C by partly deleting condition No.(1) in Annexure 1 order. It would be up to the petitioner 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, without insisting for relatives, and comply with the other conditions.
