Jagroop Singh Vs. K. Chatterjee
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) NO. 112/2000)
Petitioner: Jagroop Singh
Respondent: K. Chatterjee
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) NO. 112/2000)
Judges: K.T. THOMAS & D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 01, 2000
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION LAW
Article 136 – Detenu under COFEPOSA – High Court directing release on furnishing bond in the sum of Rs. 2 Lakhs – Later reduced to Rs. 1 Lakh – Still not affordable by him – Period due to expire on 2.2.2000 – On appeal. Held that amount is reduced to Rs. 50,000 and on furnishing bond with one surety, he be released. (Para 3, 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. We heard both sides. If the appellant found it difficult to execute a bond in a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs) it should not be a ground to continue to detain him in prison. The affordability of the prisoner must also be a consideration for the Court in fixing up the amount of the bond. Subsequently the High Court reduced the bond amount to Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) and even that was beyond the capacity of the appellant and hence appellant filed this appeal by special leave.
3. We are told that appellant was undergoing detention under an order passed as per the provision of COFEPOSA and the period of detention is to expire on 2.2.2000. We feel that the grievance of the appellant is genuine, as the trouble would not have been undertaken by the appellant in approaching this Court for this limited purpose.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and also learned Solicitor General of India we are of the opinion that the bond amount can be reduced again to Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand). We, therefore direct that appellant be released on bail (on completion of his detention period) on his executing a bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of A.C.M.M. New Delhi.
5. The Appeal is disposed of.
1. Leave granted.
2. We heard both sides. If the appellant found it difficult to execute a bond in a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs) it should not be a ground to continue to detain him in prison. The affordability of the prisoner must also be a consideration for the Court in fixing up the amount of the bond. Subsequently the High Court reduced the bond amount to Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) and even that was beyond the capacity of the appellant and hence appellant filed this appeal by special leave.
3. We are told that appellant was undergoing detention under an order passed as per the provision of COFEPOSA and the period of detention is to expire on 2.2.2000. We feel that the grievance of the appellant is genuine, as the trouble would not have been undertaken by the appellant in approaching this Court for this limited purpose.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and also learned Solicitor General of India we are of the opinion that the bond amount can be reduced again to Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand). We, therefore direct that appellant be released on bail (on completion of his detention period) on his executing a bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of A.C.M.M. New Delhi.
5. The Appeal is disposed of.
