HC sets aside bail security of ₹100 crore imposed by Faridabad court - Hindustan Times
close_game
close_game

HC sets aside bail security of 100 crore imposed by Faridabad court

Hindustan Times, Chandigarh | By, Chandigarh
Jun 29, 2020 11:20 PM IST

The high court bench of justice Arun Monga termed the condition “unjust and unfair” and observed that the condition of bail should not be such which defeats the very meaning of bail

The Punjab and Haryana high court has set aside a bail bond condition of 100 crore imposed by a Faridabad court on a developer in a cheating case.

HT Image
HT Image

The high court bench of justice Arun Monga termed the condition “unjust and unfair” and observed that the condition of bail should not be such which defeats the very meaning of bail. “Else, might as well decline the bail instead of giving an illusory one,” the bench observed.

Hindustan Times - your fastest source for breaking news! Read now.

The court was hearing a bail plea of the promoter of SRS Group, Anil Jindal booked under Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 in March 2018 by Faridabad police in a cheating case of 2 lakh. Jindal was granted bail on March 27, but imposed with a condition of submitting security of 100 crore.

He had told the court that he was behind bars since April 2018—more than 26 months. Were he to be held guilty post-trial, he already has undergone pre-trial custody equivalent to more than half (about 2/3rd) of the minimum sentence (36 months) against the offences he is suspected of. And in the appeal, he would have secured bail, but here he is in preventive custody. It was stated FIR is a result of the overall recession in the real estate sector.

However, the state had argued that the amount of 100 crore security was justified as he had cheated a large number of people by collecting funds for about 300 companies. Further, there are 67 FIRs against him and his partners in 916 complaints and conditions have been imposed in view of these FIRs.

The bench of justice Arun Monga observed that condition ought to have been determined to take into consideration the facts of this FIR with allegations though initially were of 2 lakh cheating now amount estimated at 2.75 crore due to more complaints.

“Law permits curtailing the liberty of an individual suspect, but the purpose of using that power under the law is to prevent further harm to people at large in a civilised society, including the complainant(s). Liberty cannot thus be curtailed on grounds not envisaged in law or taking a rather tyrannical view on equity to impose undue conditions on liberty, as are incapable of compliance, as in the present case,” the bench observed.

It added that when the accused had not pleaded for bail in all the FIRs, the court could not have taken into account other FIRs as those cases were not before it.

The court, however, made it clear that this order pertains to one FIR only and he will have to apply for bail in other FIRs separately.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Share this article
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
OPEN APP
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Saturday, March 09, 2024
Start 14 Days Free Trial Subscribe Now
Follow Us On