Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on August 2, 2024 said it was pained to see despite a catena of decisions deprecating the practice of putting onerous conditions for pre-arrest bail, such orders are being passed without giving due regard to the binding precedents. 

A bench of Justices C T Ravikumar and Prashant Kumar Mishra said in view of the unfortunate instances imposing very onerous conditions, especially in cases which are nothing but an off-shoot of matrimonial discordance, the courts have to be very cautious in imposing conditions while granting bail upon finding pre-arrest bail to be grantable. 

"This is to be done warily, especially when the couple concerned who are litigating in divorce proceedings, jointly though lukewarmly, agreed to attempt to reconcile and re-unite," the bench said.

The bench stressed upon the need to put compliable conditions while granting bail, recognising the human right to live with dignity and with a view to secure the presence of the accused as also unhindered course of investigation, ultimately to ensure a fair trial. 

"In respect of matters relating to matrimonial cases, conditions shall be put in such a way to make the grantee of the bail as also the griever to regain the lost love and affection and to come back to peaceful domesticity," it added.

The court here took exception to the Patna High Court's order of August 30, 2023, which granted provisional pre-arrest bail to the appellant husband Sudeep Chatterjee, in a case filed by his wife under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 

The High Court had directed both the parties to file a joint affidavit that he undertakes to fulfill all physical as well as financial requirement of the complainant so that she can lead a dignified life without any interference of any of the family members of the petitioner.

Referring to a number of Supreme Court judgments, the bench said, "After forming an opinion, taking note of all relevant aspects, that bail is grantable, conditions shall not be put to make it impossible and impracticable for the grantee to comply with."

Coming back to the present case, the bench said the impugned order itself would reveal that the parties who were about to part company, rethought and expressed their readiness to bury the hatchet and to reunite and the appellant has also agreed to withdraw the divorce case.

"One should not be oblivious of the fact that a boy or girl, will be bonded to kith and kins besides parents and siblings and such bonded relationships cannot be severed solely due to affine and affinity towards the affinal as also cognate relationships has to be taken forward with same cordialness. Relation through marriage sans support from both the families may not flourish but may perish," it said.

When the couple who are trying to bridge their emotional differences putting one among them under such an onerous condition would deprive a dignified life not only to the grantee but to both, court further opined.

While making the order of pre-arrest bail as absolute, the court thus set aside the conditions and held that those cannot be sustained.