HC seeks explanation from Ambala judicial officer over a bail order
The high court bench of justice Sureshwar Thakur stayed the release order of an accused issued by the judicial officer observing that the officer proceeded to accept personal and surety bonds furnished by the accused in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case without verifying compliance with the monetary condition imposed by high court
The Punjab and Haryana high court has sought an explanation from a judicial magistrate (first class), Ambala over “un-mindfulness” regarding compliance with a key condition imposed by the high court in a bail matter.
The high court bench of justice Sureshwar Thakur stayed the release order of an accused issued by the judicial officer observing that the officer proceeded to accept personal and surety bonds furnished by the accused in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case without verifying compliance with the monetary condition imposed by high court.
The high court while granting bail had asked the accused to deposit ₹20 lakh within three months, a precondition for bail.
The court also questioned the Haryana Police for not challenging the release orders and further said that the judicial conscience of the court is “shocked” about the manner in which the release warrants have been drawn by the JMIC in question.
The high court had passed the order in the FIR registered on September 14, 2019, in an alleged financial fraud case registered with Mahesh Nagar police station in Ambala. The bail order was passed on July 20, 2022, directing that the accused be granted bail subject to the compliance with the monetary condition. However, the release order was passed and he was given three months’ time to comply with the monetary condition. He did not comply with the same. Interestingly, the accused could not secure the release as he remained arrested in another FIR.
“It is the complete un-mindfulness on the part of the JMIC, Ambala, qua the necessity of compliance with the imperative condition as carried in the high court’s verdict, that pains the judicial conscience of this court,” the court lamented.
The court recorded that it appeared the officer passed the release orders, but only after accepting the personal and surety bonds as furnished before her by the accused.
The matter had come to light in September when the accused approached the HC seeking an extension of time for deposition of ₹20 lakh. The court granted the accused one month time to deposit ₹20 lakh. However, on November 22, the court found that he had not complied with the order again. The court stayed the release order and granted him a last opportunity to comply with the same by December 12.