The right to life and liberty of an accused person under Article 21 of the Constitution is violated when excessively large sums of surety are required in order to grant bail, the Supreme Court held.
A bench consisting of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a case in which lower courts had granted bail to an accused individual but imposed a ₹10 lakh guarantee money.
The Court stated: “The purpose of directing an accused who has been released on bail to furnish surety is to ensure that the accused is present to answer further proceedings including at the trial. Determining the amount of surety at an unreasonably high amount effectively defeats the very purpose of the grant of bail and infringes the right to life and personal liberty of the accused protected by Article 21 of the Constitution,”
Sections 409 (criminal breach of trust), 419 (impersonation), 420 (dishonest delivery of property), 467 (forgery), 468 (forgery for cheating), 471 (fraud by electronic documents), and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were the charges brought against the accused, a man named Ashok Sandeep Singh.
The accused was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court, subject to a strict surety requirement. As a result, the trial court ordered that a ₹10 lakh bail be paid to two sureties. Later, the High Court turned down an attempt to lower the surety amount.
The accused approached the supreme court as a result of this.
The top court observed that the petitioner, a retired judicial clerk, was still being held in prison since he was unable to provide the ₹10 lakh bail sum, even after the High Court’s October 18, 2023, judgment.
As a result, the Supreme Court decided to lower the surety amount to ₹25,000.
The Supreme Court further added: “We accordingly order and direct that the quantum of surety which has been fixed by the trial Judge in the amount of ₹10 lakh shall stand reduced to ₹25,000. Likewise, the personal bond which his to be filed by the petitioner shall be in the amount of ₹25,000,”
Case Tittle: Ashok Sandeep Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh