Sahil Jain Vs Superintendent (Anti Evasion) (Supreme Court of India)
The case involves judicial scrutiny of a bail condition requiring the furnishing of a ₹50 lakh bank guarantee in a prosecution relating to alleged wrongful Input Tax Credit of ₹64 crores. The matter was first considered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and subsequently examined by the Supreme Court of India.
The appellant had initially been granted bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by order dated 11.01.2021. The bail order imposed several conditions, including furnishing a personal bond of ₹1 crore with two sureties of the same amount, along with an additional requirement to furnish a bank guarantee/FDR of ₹50 lakhs. Other conditions included appearance before the Court on each hearing, restrictions on leaving the country, surrender of passport, and prohibitions on influencing witnesses or committing similar offences.
Read HC Judgment in this case: P&H HC Upheld Bail Condition as Earlier Challenge Already Decided
The appellant challenged the bank guarantee condition before the High Court in 2021, but the challenge was dismissed on 03.03.2021. The High Court held that the condition was based on sound judicial principles and did not warrant interference. Following this, the appellant complied with the condition by arranging a surety who furnished the bank guarantee, and he was released on bail. The appellant continued to appear regularly before the trial Court and did not violate any bail conditions.
