Allahabad High Court warns against arbitrary bail conditions that stall release of poor persons from jail

The Allahabad High Court recently directed trial courts to ensure that the orders granting bail should not be frustrated due to arbitrary surety conditions that are fixed without considering the socio-economic status of the bail applicant [Arman v. State of U.P.]. .The Court pointed out that several persons who are financially poor or from marginalized sections of society may not be able to afford complying with such bail conditions. Justice Ajay Bhanot observed that it is the responsibility of trial courts to apply their minds by considering the socio-economic status of the accused while fixing sureties."This appears to be a serious matter. The large number of the persons who belong to marginalized sections of the society or financially destitute are unable to arrange or provide sureties fixed arbitrarily by the learned trial courts. To deal with this situation the constitutional Courts have constantly held that the right of bail cannot be defeated by arbitrary surety demands. It is the responsibility of the learned trial court to apply their minds to the socioeconomic status of the accused and accordingly fix the sureties. The law has cautioned against determining sureties in a mechanical manner", the Court said in its August 30 order. .The Court proceeded to call on trial courts to ensure that bail sureties are fixed in line with the directions already issued in the case of Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. In the Arvind Singh case, the High Court had issued detailed guidelines to curb the mechanical imposition of bail conditions. .The Court's observations came while granting bail to a man who had been in jail since September 2020. The man moved the High Court for bail after a trial court rejected his bail plea in one of several cases filed against him. The High Court granted him bail after noting that the accused man had explained his criminal history, that he was not a flight risk and that he had cooperated with the investigation and trial proceedings. The High Court also noted that despite having been granted bail by the trial court in other criminal cases registered against him, the accused man had not been released on bail due to his inability to furnish sureties..This prompted the Court to direct trial courts to fix sureties after due application of minds and considering the socio-economic conditions of the bail applicant. "The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant," the Court said.It also directed the Agra District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to ensure that appropriate legal aid is made available to the applicant for submitting sureties and the completion of other formalities for his release on bail..The Court recounted that in the Arvind Singh case, it had already directed the DLSA to extend legal aid to prisoners who are not able to enjoy the fruits of liberty granted by bail orders on account of their failure to provide the sureties fixed by trial courts. The DLSA was also asked to help such prisoners in filing their applications for recall of onerous surety demands. "The District Legal Services Authorities and the learned trial courts have not adhered to the aforesaid directions in the facts of this case", the Court noted.The Court added that the absence of legal aid to the applicant in this case was evident from the fact that he could not approach the High Court for bail until 2024."The applicant is financially destitute and belongs to a marginalized section of the society ... The applicant could not approach this Court at an earlier point in time to seek his remedy of bail as he did not have access to legal aid nor was given legal advice to approach this Court earlier and also did not possess resources to file the instant bail application," the Court noted..It proceeded to direct the concerned District Judge at Agra to look into the issues flagged by the Court and send a report to the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee of the High Court. A copy of the order was also sent to the Judicial Training and Research Institute at Lucknow, which had had earlier been asked to sensitise trial court judges on such issues. .Advocate Brijesh Kumar Pal appeared for the bail applicant. Advocate Ali Jamal Khan assisted the Court as amicus curiae.Additional Government Advocate Paritosh Kumar Malviya represented the State of Uttar Pradesh. .[Read Order]