RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 913/12 of the Cherthala Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They applied for pre-arrest bail before the Sessions Judge, Alappuzha apprehending their arrest and detention. The learned Sessions Judge, allowed their application imposing some conditions, one among which directed them to furnish cash security of Rs. 3 lakhs before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Cherthala and its production before the officer in the event of their arrest. That condition imposed is onerous and incapable of performance since the petitioners are not possessed of the means to raise such funds, is their case to seek modification of the aforesaid condition, submitting that they are prepared to abide by all other conditions imposed by the learned Sub Judge and also to co-operate with the investigation of the crime. Having regard to the offences imputed and also that the crime, at this stage, is only under the process of investigation, I find, the orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge, directing deposit of cash security as fixed to enable the petitioners to enjoy the pre-arrest bail granted to them is not in consonance with law. To secure the presence of the accused for the purpose of investigation, execution of bond for the sum fixed with solvent sureties would normally suffice and meet the ends of justice. The Apex Court in Amarjith Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2009 16 SCC 649has deprecated the insistence of cash security to enlarge an accused on bail. Order passed by the Sessions Judge directing deposit of cash security, that alone, shall stand vacated, and, in all other respects, conditions imposed for granting pre-arrest bail shall remain in tact.