The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that bail conditions should be fair and not place a price tag on personal liberty. It also struck down a trial court’s order requiring an accused to furnish Rs 50 lakh surety bond, while describing it unfair and excessive.
The court asserted that bail was meant to ensure the appearance of an accused for trial, not to punish them. Unless there was a strong reason to deny liberty, a person should not be kept in jail. It added that judicial custody was meant to prevent crime, not act as a penalty.
“The primary objective of bail is to ensure the appearance of the accused at trial, and this objective can be achieved by imposing reasonable conditions. A surety bond of such exorbitant value cannot be deemed reasonable in good conscience, as it effectively places a monetary price on liberty, which is inherently invaluable. Deprivation of liberty must not be used as a form of punishment but rather as a measure of last resort to secure the ends of justice,” Justice Harpreet Singh Brar asserted.
The court also observed that excessive bail conditions often left the accused stuck in jail, causing immense mental and financial distress to them and their families.
“The imposition of such an egregious condition would, in almost all cases, result in the accused being unable to furnish the required surety, thereby depriving them of their liberty and subjecting them to the harsh realities of jail life. The psychological and physical toll of incarceration during this phase can be devastating. The adverse impact extends beyond the individual to their innocent family members, who bear the burden of financial distress and emotional anguish. Such collateral damage undermines the principle of presumption of innocence and the larger goal of ensuring a fair and equitable justice system,” the court added.
Taking the factors into account, the court modified the trial court’s order, reducing the surety bond requirement from Rs 50 lakh to Rs 50,000.
The ruling came in response to a petition challenging a Jalandhar trial court’s order in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner was ordered to furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs 50 lakh vide the order under challenge.
