Bombay High Court Allows Modification of Bail Condition in IPC Case — Court Cannot Direct Accused to Apply for Passport. Condition to Deposit Passport Only Applicable if Accused Possesses One; Trial Court's Order Directing Surrender Within Four Months Quashed.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 521
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner was an accused in FIR No. 20/2024 registered at Agassaim Police Station for offences under Sections 307, 504, 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the IPC. He was arrested on 03.04.2024 and applied for bail before the Additional Sessions Court, which was granted on 23.04.2024 with conditions including that the petitioner deposit his passport. The petitioner did not possess a passport and had never applied for one. He filed an application for modification of this condition, supported by an affidavit and a memo from his mother, and the investigating officer confirmed that the petitioner never applied for a passport. However, the Additional Sessions Judge, by order dated 13.05.2024, refused to modify the condition and instead suspended it for four months, directing the petitioner to deposit the passport within that period. The petitioner challenged this order before the Bombay High Court. The High Court held that the trial court had no power to direct the petitioner to apply for a passport and then deposit it. The condition to deposit a passport can only be imposed if the accused possesses one. The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and condition no. 3 was modified to read: 'The Applicant to deposit the passport, if any.' The rule was made absolute.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Bail Conditions - Passport Deposit - Section 437, 439 CrPC - Court cannot impose condition to deposit passport if accused does not possess one, nor can it direct accused to apply for passport - Held that condition must be modified to 'deposit passport, if any' (Paras 5-15).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a court can impose a condition on bail directing an accused to deposit a passport when the accused does not possess one, and whether the court can direct the accused to apply for a passport and then deposit it.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order dated 13.05.2024 is quashed and set aside. The application for modification of condition no. 3 is allowed, and condition no. 3 is modified to read: 'The Applicant to deposit the passport, if any.' Rule made absolute.

Law Points

  • Bail conditions must be reasonable and within court's power
  • Court cannot direct accused to apply for passport
  • Condition to deposit passport only if accused possesses it
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (7) 93

Criminal Writ Petition No. 58 of 2024

2024-05-27

M.S. Sonak, J.

Mr. Amonkar for Petitioner, Mr. Bhobe, Public Prosecutor for State

MR. ZAKAULLA KHAZI, S/o. Mr. Khasim khazi

State of Goa

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal writ petition challenging an unusual bail condition imposed by the Additional Sessions Court directing the petitioner to deposit his passport despite not possessing one.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought modification of condition no. 3 of the bail order to read 'deposit passport, if any' instead of 'deposit the passport'.

Filing Reason

The petitioner was granted bail with a condition to deposit his passport, but he did not possess a passport and had never applied for one. The trial court refused to modify the condition and instead directed him to deposit the passport within four months.

Previous Decisions

The Additional Sessions Court granted bail on 23.04.2024 with condition no. 3 requiring deposit of passport. On application for modification, the court on 13.05.2024 suspended the condition for four months and directed the petitioner to deposit the passport within that period.

Issues

Whether a court can impose a condition on bail directing an accused to deposit a passport when the accused does not possess one. Whether a court can direct an accused to apply for a passport and then deposit it as a condition of bail.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that he does not possess a passport and never applied for one, so condition no. 3 is impossible to comply with. The trial court's order directing him to deposit the passport within four months effectively forces him to apply for a passport, which is beyond the court's power. State submitted that the investigating officer confirmed the petitioner never applied for a passport.

Ratio Decidendi

A court granting bail cannot impose a condition that is impossible to comply with or that compels the accused to take affirmative action to create an object (like applying for a passport) solely for the purpose of depositing it. The condition to deposit a passport can only be imposed if the accused possesses one.

Judgment Excerpts

While imposing the condition for the grant of bail, the learned Trial Court does not have such power to direct any person to apply for a passport, obtain it and then surrender it. The direction to deposit the passport could be given only if the Petitioner or the Accused possesses it.

Procedural History

Petitioner arrested on 03.04.2024. Bail granted on 23.04.2024 with condition to deposit passport. Petitioner filed modification application on ground of no passport. Trial court on 13.05.2024 suspended condition for four months and directed deposit within that period. Petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 58 of 2024 before Bombay High Court, which was allowed on 27.05.2024.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 307, 504, 506(ii), 34
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 437, 439
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Improper Investigation. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Partly Allows Writ Petition of Hindustan Unilever Against Industrial Court's Stay of Domestic Enquiry. Employee Granted Right to Engage Lawyer in Enquiry When Employer's Representative is Legally Trained Under Model Standing Orders.