Reasonable bail conditions require proportionality, as an excessive fine deposit for release pending appeal was reduced.

A bail condition requiring deposit of 35% of the fine amount for suspension of sentence was treated as unduly harsh because appellate conditions under Section 389 CrPC must remain reasonable and not effectively defeat release on bail. The Court applied the settled principle that fine- or compensation-linked terms should bear a rational relationship to the accused's circumstances and capacity, and should not impair personal liberty by imposing an excessive burden. The deposit requirement was therefore modified to 10% of the fine amount, while the remaining bail conditions were left unchanged.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition requiring deposit of 35% of the fine amount for release on bail pending appeal was onerous and liable to be modified.

Analysis: The application arose from a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act with fine forming part of the substantive sentence. In the context of suspension of sentence and release on bail under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court noted that appellate courts may impose terms, but such conditions must be reasonable and should not be so harsh as to effectively deny bail. The Court also considered the principle that compensation or fine-related conditions must bear a reasonable relationship to the circumstances and the accused's capacity, and relied on the settled approach that excessively onerous bail conditions offend personal liberty.

Conclusion: The condition was held to be onerous and was modified by reducing the deposit requirement to 10% of the fine amount, with the remaining bail conditions maintained.

---