Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5.A careful perusal of the order of this Court, dated 24.04.2017 made in Crl.M.P.No.3888 of 2017 in Crl.O.P.No.2891 of 2017 (Sagayam @ Devasagayam Vs.The Inspector of Police, G-7, Chetpet Police Station, Chennai, would reveal that this court has imposed one of the conditions for releasing the vehicle, which would run thus:-

''17.While granting bail, the Court can direct the accused to execute bail bond. As per Section 440 Cr.P.C., the bond amount should not be excessive. When a person so directed to execute the bond either with surety or without surety is not able to furnish the sureties, then under Section 445 Cr.P.C., he has the option to offer cash security. But even then, it must be a reasonable amount. It should not be an arbitrary, excessive amount. It should not be in the nature of deprivation of grant of bail by fixing an heavy amount as surety amount. If heavy amount is directed to be deposited as cash security, the bailee/accused will not be in a position to comply it. If heavy amount is demanded from the surety, then the bailor will not be forthcoming. And 'haves' will go out, while 'have nots' http://www.judis.nic.in will remain in jail.
18.Reading Sections 440, 441 and 445 Cr.P.C. together, it is clear that straightaway a Court cannot direct the accused to deposit cash security.

First of all, the court has to direct execution of bail bond by the sureties in case if the release is not on his own bond. Only in lieu of that deposit of cash security could be directed (see Section 445 Cr.P.C.)

19.As already stated even if the cash security is ordered under Section 445 Cr.P.C., the Court must pay regard to the circumstances of the case and the amount should not be excessive (see Section 440 Cr.P.C. Also see State of Mysore vs.H.Venkatarama Kotaiyah (1968 Crl.L.J.696), Moti Ram and Others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [(1978) 4 SCC 47], Babu Singh and Others vs. The State of U.P (AIR 1978 SC 527), Gokul Das vs.The State of Assam (1981 Crl.L.J.229), Afsar Khan vs. State of Karnataka (1992 Crl.L.J.1676), Bhikhabhai Udesinh Darbar vs. State of Gujarat [(1998) 1 GLR 315], Parades Patra and Another vs. State of Orissa(1993 II OLR 452), Sandeep Jain vs. National Capital Territory of Delhi [(2000)2 SCC 66], Amarjit Singh Vs.State of NCT of Delhi (JT 2002 (1) SC 291), Sheikhh Ayub vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [(2004) 13 SCC 457], Ramathal and Others vs.Inspector of Police and another [(2009) 12 SCC 721], Amaldoss and others vs. The Inspector of Police, Patteeswaram Police Station, Thanjavur District (Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.19196 and 19197 of 2014 dated http://www.judis.nic.in 05.02.2015) and Sakthivel and another vs. The Inspector of Police, Belukurichi Police Station, Namakkal District (Crl.O.P.Nos.835 and 836 of 2015 dated 04.02.2015).''