Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In the case of David Morrison V. State of Uttarakhand, the High Court discharged the person on bail even the surety was unavailable. The Single bench headed by Justice Alok Kumar Verma held that a person unable to produce surety cannot debar him from obtaining bail in such case he can obtain bail by furnishing a reasonable amount of money with the court.
The petitioner herein is a foreign national and was charged under Sec. 420, 120-B of IPC and Sec. 14 of the Foreigners Act. On 8th October 2020, his application for depositing the money instead of executing a surety was dismissed. The court dismissed the petition as Sec. 441 of CRPC requires a surety to be executed to be released by a police officer, court, or any other person. He had been granted bail by the High court on 23rd July 2020, on the condition that he shall be executing a surety. But when the petitioner could not execute a surety as his passport was surrendered before the concerned Magistrate his bail was rejected. The petitioner approached the court against the said order.
When the matter came before the High Court the court made the following observations:
• The took into consideration that the petitioner was ready to deposit the money in the first instant he was asked to furnish the surety.
• The court took Sec.445 of CRPC into consideration and held that the benefit of the section must be given to the person who cannot furnish surety. As the accused herein is a foreigner, his liberty cannot be jeopardized just because he is unable to furnish the surety.
Thus, the petitioner was discharged on bail after depositing the reasonable amount of money as surety and conferring other condition which would not hamper the investigating process.
86540
103860
630
114
59824