Jeyaseelan vs State of Tamilnadu - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 45983

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 45983

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K. Murali Shankar, J
Jeyaseelan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
CRL OP(MD). No.9923 of 2026

Important Points

The imposition of a significant monetary deposit as a mandatory pre-condition for the grant of bail is considered onerous and inconsistent with established legal practice, necessitating its removal or modification.

Subject

Criminal Law - Bail Modification

Act Referred

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS): S.483(i)(b)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): S.123
Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTP Act): S.6(b), S.24(1)

Headnote

The petitioner filed an application under Section 483(i)(b) of BNSS seeking modification of a bail condition imposed by the trial court, specifically the requirement to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as a pre-condition for bail. The court examined the propriety of imposing monetary deposits as a condition for bail in light of judicial precedents against such onerous conditions. The court determined that the condition was excessive and legally unsustainable. The core issue was whether the imposition of a high monetary deposit amount as a pre-condition for bail constitutes an onerous condition. The court reasoned that in view of established legal principles, conditions that act as a deterrent to the enjoyment of bail should be avoided, and therefore, set aside the impugned deposit direction while requiring the execution of a personal bond with sureties instead. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T.A. Ebenezer
For the Respondents: S.Siva Subramanian

Table of Content
1. challenge to excessive bail conditions requiring monetary deposit. (Para 1 , 2)
2. onerous bail conditions set aside in favor of bonds and sureties. (Para 3)

ORDER

The above Criminal Original Petition has been filed invoking Section

483(i)(b) of BNSS challenging the conditions imposed in Cr.M.P.No.1441 of 2026 dated on 21.05.2026 on the file of the learned Vacation Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District, Srivilliputhur, wherein the learned Vacation Sessions Judge imposed a condition directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.5 lakhs before the Court under the head of Criminal Court Deposit.

2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner and another accused have been charged for the offences under Section 123 of BNS r/w Section 6(b) and 24(1)

of COTP Act.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner is involved in seven previous cases, out of which five cases of a similar nature are still pending. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has, time and again, reiterated that imposition of a condition requiring deposit of money as a pre-condition for grant of bail should ordinarily be avoided. In the present case, the learned Vacation Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, has imposed a condition directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, which is onerous and cannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, the first condition imposed in the order dated 21.05.2026 made in Cr.M.P.No.1441 of 2026 is set aside. Insofar as the second condition is concerned, the same is modified as follows: “The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-

(Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputhur.”

The other conditions imposed by the learned Vacation Sessions Judge shall remain unaltered.