The court allowed the appellant's petition to modify bail conditions, waiving the requirement for an immovable property surety and substituting cash sureties instead.
Bail to be granted on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with two cash sureties, removing the immovable property requirement.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CRIMINAL PETITION No.9877 OF 2021
ORDER :
Heard Mr. Ramesh Muddam, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State. Perused the record.
“the petitioner/A1 shall be enlarged on bail on his execution of a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh only) and furnishing two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVI Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar and one of such sureties shall be of an immovable property free of encumbrances, on the conditions that (1) he shall not leave the State of Telangana without the permission of the Trial Court, (2) he shall appear before the SHO of PS concerned on every Sunday and Wednesday for a period of (3) months, (3) he shall not induce, threaten or otherwise influence the witnesses in any manner till the conclusion of the trial and (4) his future default from appearance before the Court shall not be considered leniently.”
KL,J Crl.P. No.9877 of 2021
2
“The petitioner/A1 is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajenderanagar.
The other bail conditions shall remain unaltered.”
KL,J Crl.P. No.9877 of 2021
3
upon and propriety of insisting that surety should be from the same district etc. Relying on the said judgment and other judgments of the Apex Court as well as other High Courts, this Court also extensively dealt with the issue in relation to ‘furnishing of surety’ in Ayush Mahendra v. the State of Telangana2 .
“ the petitioner - accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two cash sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the XVI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad”.
However the other conditions imposed by the Court below shall remain unaltered.
KL,J Crl.P. No.9877 of 2021
4
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, in
the criminal petition stand closed.
_________________
K. LAKSHMAN, J
23rd DECEMBER, 2021 Mgr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the condition requiring one surety to provide immovable property can be relaxed for a petitioner unable to satisfy it.
Whether the bail grant can be modified to require only cash security instead of immovable property security.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ayush MahendraReferred¶17
Ayush Mahendra v. the State of Telangana
Petitioner
State
K. LAKSHMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
