Litigants Taking Courts for a Ride: SC Bars Bail on Deposit Promises

The Supreme Court has directed all High Courts and Trial Courts across the country to henceforth refrain from granting anticipatory or regular bail to an accused based on undertakings to deposit money, calling the practice an abuse of judicial discretion and a blow to the dignity of courts.

“We make it clear and that too in the form of directions that henceforth no Trial Court or any of the High Courts shall pass any order of grant of regular bail or anticipatory bail on any undertaking that the accused might be ready to furnish for the purpose of obtaining appropriate reliefs,” a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan said.

The court passed the directions while dismissing an appeal by Gajanan Dattatray Gore, who had failed to comply with an undertaking to deposit Rs. 25 lakh given as a condition for bail in a misappropriation case involving Rs. 1.60 crore.

The Bombay High Court had, upon non compliance, cancelled his bail and ordered him to surrender.

The Top Court strongly deprecated the growing trend of accused persons securing bail by offering to deposit money and later reneging on such promises.

“Litigants are taking the courts for a ride and thereby undermining the dignity and honour of the court,” the bench said.

The appellant had been arrested on August 17, 2023, in connection with offences under Sections 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, and 506 IPC.

The complainant, who ran a company and an educational institute, alleged that Gore, his former business development manager, had siphoned off Rs. 1.60 crore.

After his bail was rejected by the trial court, Gore moved the High Court, which granted bail on April 1, 2024, on the basis of an affidavit cum undertaking stating that he would deposit Rs. 25 lakh within five months.

The High Court treated this statement as an assurance and incorporated it into the bail order.

However, Gore never deposited the amount.

Upon the complainant’s application, the High Court modified its earlier order and cancelled the bail on July 1, 2025. The appellant challenged this cancellation before the Supreme Court.

“We have come across cases like the one in hand where accused persons have gone to the extent of filing affidavits in the form of undertaking that they would deposit a particular amount… and then conveniently resile from such undertakings saying it is an onerous condition,” the Court observed.

The bench stressed that bail orders must rest solely on the merits of the case, and not on any financial proposals made by the accused or their counsel.

“In many cases, it is argued on behalf of the accused that he never made such a statement and the court recorded it on its own. At times, the blame is thrown on the lawyer,” it noted.

In this case, the Supreme Court noted, the appellant “on his own free will and volition” filed the undertaking, and it was improper for his counsel to later argue that the deposit requirement was unreasonable.

“It reflects on professional ethics,” the Court remarked.

Citing the larger issue, the Court said: “If at all the High Court wanted to release the appellant on bail, it should have first asked him to deposit the amount within a particular period of time and upon such deposit the appellant could have been released.”

Reiterating that courts must decide bail pleas strictly in accordance with law, the Court said: “If the case is made out on merits, the court may exercise its discretion. If not, the plea shall be rejected. However, under no circumstances shall High Courts or trial courts pass conditional bail orders requiring monetary undertakings.”

The Court dismissed the appeal with costs of Rs. 50,000 for abuse of process and directed the amount be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre within a week.

It also directed its Registry to circulate copies of the order to all High Courts across the country.

Case Title: Gajanan Dattatray Gore v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Judgment Date: July 28, 2025

Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan