TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 21
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6. In view of the above discussion, considering the period of incarceration of about six years and two months undergone by the applicant, and in view of the fact that he has also been granted bail in the case pertaining to predicate offence by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the ground that the investigation has not been completed and the trial has not even begun, and considering that there seems to be no possibility of trial in this case concluding too within the remaining duration of the maximum prescribed sentence under Section 4 of PMLA, inasmuch as the same has not even begun as of now, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant, on furnishing a personal bond and surety in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- each and on surrendering the passport before the learned Trial Court, which be not released without permission of this Court, considering that investigation qua the present applicant is still pending. The rest of the conditions be imposed by the learned Special Court, since as per order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the learned Trial Court has been directed to impose conditions as deemed appropriate while granting bail in predicate offence. 37. Taking i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ition of such onerous and practically impossible conditions would defeat the very purpose of bail and violate the applicant's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It is contended that the applicant has already undergone over 6 years and 4 months of incarceration in India, apart from 130 days in custody in the UAE prior to his extradition. The maximum sentence, if convicted, can be seven years, yet the trial has not even commenced. It is argued that in such circumstances, continuing to impose bail conditions, which the applicant cannot fulfil, would serve no legitimate purpose and would rather amount to a denial of liberty. 9. During the course of proceedings before this Court, the concerned Jail Superintendent was directed to produce the applicant through video-conferencing from the concerned Jail. The applicant herein had appeared and submitted that he had preferred the present application, through his counsel, as he has no one in India who can stand as a surety for him. 10. Conversely, the learned Special Counsel appearing for the DoE has opposed the present application and contended that insofar as the first condition i.e. furnishing a personal bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ropriate request before the Trial Court for imposing necessary conditions before releasing the petitioner on bail..." 15. Pursuant to the above order, the CBI had moved an application seeking to place on record its request to impose appropriate conditions on the applicant herein for his release on bail. 16. In the meantime, this Court had granted regular bail to the applicant on 04.03.2025 in case arising out of the present ECIR. Except imposing two conditions, i.e. furnishing of personal bond and one surety, and of depositing his passport with the Trial Court, this Court had also directed the DoE to request the Trial Court to impose appropriate conditions on the applicant. After hearing arguments on behalf of the applicant/accused and the DoE, the learned Trial Court was pleased to impose the following conditions: "a) The accused shall mark his attendance physically in the office of CBI/IO once every 15 days after his release. b) The accused shall provide his mobile phone/E-mail to the IO and the Court immediately after his release, on which he shall always be available. c) The accused shall also provide his residential address in Delhi, where he w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egarding this case at any forum, during the trial of this case. i) The accused shall extend all cooperation in further investigations, if any required and during the trial. j) He shall not leave India without the permission of this Court. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2814-2815 of 2024 in case titled as Frank Vitus Vs. Narcotics Control Bureau and Ors. decided on 06.01.2025, the IO/CBI are directed to immediately inform the concerned Registration Officer appointed under Rule 3 of The Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992 about the grant of bail to his accused, so that the Registration Officer can bring the fact of grant of bail to the notice of the concerned civil authorities constituted as per Section 3 of the Foreigners Order 1948..." 18. Thereafter, as apparent from the order dated 11.03.2025, the learned counsel for the applicant had submitted before the learned Trial Court that the applicant needs to apply for a fresh British Passport online, for which necessary directions may be given to the jail authorities. The learned Trial Court had directed as under: " ...It is further submitted by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 04.03.2025, stands modified, to the extent that applicant may be released on regular bail, without him depositing his passport immediately; however, the FRRO shall ensure that the applicant does not leave the country, and the British High Commission (or the concerned authority issuing the applicant's passport) shall ensure that the applicant's fresh passport, whenever the same is ready, is not handed over to the applicant, but directly deposited with the learned Trial Court under intimation to this Court. 22. The second argument of the applicant pertains to modifying or waiving the condition of furnishing a surety bond, on the ground that he has no roots in India and there is no one who can stand surety for him. The applicant contends that he has no one in India who can stand as a surety for him and refusal to modify the said condition would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution; however, the DoE argues that furnishing a surety bond is a mandatory condition as per Section 441 of Cr.P.C. 23. Thus, the issue before this Court is as to whether this Court can dispense with the requirement that the applicant, who is an accused in the present ECIR - must furnish a surety ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat "bail conditions cannot be fanciful, arbitrary or freakish" and are primarily aimed at ensuring that the accused does not disrupt the investigation, destroy evidence, commit further offenses, or fail to appear before the trial court, ultimately facilitating an efficient resolution of the trial; 27.8. Upon reviewing the Supreme Court's decisions in the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee and Frank Vitus cases, it is clear that while bail conditions must be achievable by the prisoner, the court must still enforce those requirements that are necessary to ensure the availability of the prisoner for trial and for compliance with any sentence imposed, maintaining the integrity of the judicial process; and 27.9. After reviewing the judicial context, this court believes that the conditions imposed for grant of bail or suspension of sentence must pass muster on the anvil of the following criteria : First, the conditions must be necessary to ensure that the accused remains available for trial. Second, the conditions must be necessary to ensure that the integrity of the judicial process is preserved. Third, the conditions must not be impossible for the accused to fulfi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s must not stand in the way of a person's liberty. The purpose of justice is not served, by merely 'encashing' a prisoner's flight-risk; and merely accepting cash in lieu of surety would not uphold the integrity of the judicial process; and 28.5. In the opinion of this court, before a court waives the requirement of furnishing a surety or substitutes it with a cash deposit, it is necessary to duly consider the facts and circumstances of a given case, and if necessary to seek appropriate verification, to be satisfied that the prisoner suffers from a genuine inability to furnish surety." (Emphasis added) 26. Therefore, the Coordinate Bench has held that while the requirement of furnishing a surety bond by a third person is the norm, the same may be waived or substituted with a cash deposit in exceptional cases, particularly where the accused or convict is able to demonstrate a genuine and verifiable inability to furnish surety. However, such waiver or substitution must not be granted mechanically or for mere convenience, but only after careful scrutiny of the facts and circumstances of each case, including verification where necessary. Importantly, the Court em....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ght of the fact that the condition of furnishing a surety is not merely a procedural formality, but serves a critical function in securing the presence of the accused during the course of trial. Its ramifications extend beyond the mere possibility of undergoing the sentence upon conviction. The presence of the accused is essential for ensuring the effective conduct of trial proceedings and if an accused was to abscond and remain unavailable, the same may cause prejudice to the trial. Therefore, while genuine inability to furnish surety can be considered by a court, the court must also ensure that any relaxation in this regard does not compromise the integrity or continuity of the trial process. 30. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the applicant's prolonged incarceration, his status as a foreign national with no roots in India, and his inability to arrange for a surety locally, this Court is inclined to modify the bail condition imposed earlier. Instead of the requirement to furnish a personal bond and surety bond of Rs. 5,00,000/- each - the applicant shall now furnish a personal bond of Rs. 5,00,000/- along with a cash surety in the enhance....