Summary
Default bail cannot be made conditional on depositing the amount allegedly involved in the offence. An undertaking given during an earlier regular bail application did not justify that condition. The Court deleted the Rs.8,00,000 deposit requirement and replaced daily police attendance with cooperation and attendance when called for investigation, preserving the remaining bail conditions.
Issues
- Whether default bail could be conditioned on depositing the alleged offence amount by reference to an earlier undertaking.
- Whether daily police attendance until further orders was justified.
Provisions considered
- Section 167(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Protected the accrued right to default bail from a condition requiring deposit of the alleged offence amount. (¶¶ 9, 9.1, 9.2, 11)
Held
- Where the applicable statutory investigation period has expired without the charge-sheet and the accused applies and is prepared to furnish bail, default bail cannot be frustrated by requiring deposit of the alleged offence amount. (¶ 9)
- The wife’s earlier undertaking in regular bail proceedings did not justify a monetary deposit condition for default bail. The circumstances governing regular and statutory bail differ. (¶¶ 9.1, 9.2)
- Indefinite daily attendance at the police station was too harsh. Cooperation and attendance when called for investigation were appropriate, with breach permitting recourse to the court for cancellation. (¶¶ 10, 11)
Result
Appeals allowed. Rs.8,00,000 deposit condition quashed; daily reporting replaced by cooperation and attendance when called for investigation or interrogation, with consequences including cancellation for non-cooperation. Remaining High Court bail conditions maintained.