Bail conditions must be reasonable and proportionate; onerous FDR requirements were struck down and reduced.

Bail conditions under Section 437(3) CrPC must be reasonable, connected to securing attendance and the progress of trial, and not arbitrary or unduly onerous. A condition requiring sureties to furnish FDRs was found to have no statutory basis and to be excessively burdensome because it froze substantial funds for an indeterminate period, so it was set aside. The condition requiring deposit of 25% of the amount involved was treated as capable of stricter regulation in an economic offence context, but it was reduced to 15% by way of FDR in court to preserve a fair balance with the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the bail conditions requiring deposit of 25% of the amount involved and furnishing of FDR by the sureties were excessively harsh and liable to be modified.

Analysis: Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 permits the Court to impose conditions in bail matters, including conditions necessary in the interests of justice, but such conditions must remain reasonable and connected with securing the attendance of the accused and advancing the trial process. The condition requiring the sureties to deposit FDRs had no statutory basis and was considered unduly onerous because it locked a substantial amount for an indeterminate period. In relation to the condition requiring deposit of a percentage of the alleged tax liability, the Court recognised that economic offences justify a stricter approach, yet such conditions cannot be arbitrary or excessively burdensome and must be balanced against the presumption of innocence and the right to liberty.

Conclusion: The condition requiring FDR deposit by the sureties was set aside, and the condition requiring deposit of 25% of the amount involved was modified to 15% by way of FDR in court. The application for modification was thus allowed in part.

Ratio Decidendi: Bail conditions may be imposed to secure attendance and protect the administration of justice, but they must not be arbitrary, exorbitant, or unrelated to that purpose and must preserve a fair balance with personal liberty.

---