The pleas seeking pre-arrest bail are not money recovery proceedings and imposing the condition on the accused of paying interim compensation to the victim for such a relief is unjustified, the Supreme Court has said.
The top court made the observations while hearing the anticipatory bail pleas of an estranged husband and his family members in a matrimonial dispute.
A bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Bela M Trivedi modified the order of the Jharkhand High Court by which it had granted anticipatory bail to three people on furnishing bonds of Rs 25,000 each besides depositing a sum of Rs 7.5 lakh as ad-interim compensation to the woman who had filed the matrimonial case.
We are clearly of the view that in essence, the petitions seeking relief of pre-arrest bail are not money recovery proceedings and, ordinarily, there is no justification for adopting such a course that for the purpose of being given the concession of pre-arrest bail, the person concerned apprehending arrest has to make payment, it said in the order passed on September 29.
The bench said the condition of depositing a sum of Rs 7.5 lakh for the purpose of granting the relief of pre-arrest bail cannot be approved. For what has been observed and discussed …, the order impugned is modified in the manner that while other directions and requirements of the order i.e., of releasing the appellants on bail in the event of arrest on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000/-, shall remain intact but the other part of the order, requiring the appellants to deposit a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/-, shall stand annulled, it said. Lawyer Amit Kumar appeared in the case for one of the parties.