Sahil Jain Vs Superintendent (Anti Evasion) (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court adjudicated a petition filed under Section 484 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of a bail condition requiring the furnishing of a bank guarantee or fixed deposit receipt (FDR) of ₹50 lakhs. The petitioner contended that the earlier surety had withdrawn and that he was financially incapable of complying with the condition.
Read SC Judgment in this case: SC Set Aside ₹50 Lakh Bail Condition as Excessive Despite Prior HC Approval in FAKE invoice Case
The petitioner was facing prosecution in a complaint case and had earlier been granted bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by order dated 11.01.2021. The bail was subject to several conditions, including furnishing a bank guarantee/FDR of ₹50 lakhs, appearance before the Court on all dates of hearing, restriction on leaving the country without permission, surrender of passport, non-commission of similar offences, non-interference with witnesses or evidence, and maintaining the same appearance during trial.
The petitioner had previously challenged the condition of furnishing a ₹50 lakh bank guarantee before the High Court through a separate petition, which was dismissed on 03.03.2021. Following dismissal, the petitioner complied with the condition by arranging a surety who furnished the bank guarantee, and he was released on bail. The petitioner thereafter regularly appeared before the trial Court and did not violate any bail conditions.
