- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant and the learned AGA. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that this Court had passed an order on 7.10.2013 directing the appellant, who had been in jail for 28 years, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. However, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Jhansi passed an order on 23.10.2013 pursuant to our order dated 7.10.2013 that the appellant Ratan Lal be released in ST No. 46 of 1986 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Jhansi on a personal bond for an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of the like amount. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as the appellant could not arrange for said sureties, he could not be released on bail. Therefore, the said order is clear violation of order dated 7.10.2013 passed by this Court. In the said order for releasing the appellant on bail, a personal bond was required to be furnished.
(2.) In Moti Ram and others v. State of M.P., 1978 4 SCC 47 and Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, 1980 1 SCC 81, the Apex Court has reproached subordinate Courts for considering the obligation to pay a sum of money on forfeiture of the bonds or sureties for non-appearance to be the only means for enforcing the attendance of the accused to face trial or to receive sentence, and for fixing bail amounts only in terms of the nature of the crime, which approach favours the wealthy and discriminates against the impecunious litigant, and eschews other criteria, such as the roots of an accused in the community, his financial standing, or other features, such as the incapacity of an accused to abscond on account of his young or old age, or being a woman, or physically infirm or ailing. For failure of a penurious accused to arrange for the heavy bail amount or local sureties, he is forced to remain in jail for long periods of time even after being granted bail, Krishna Iyer J. speaking for the bench in paragraph 30 in Moti Ram has directed: Even so, poor men-Indians are in monetary terms indigents, young persons, infirm individuals and women are weak categories and Courts should be liberal in releasing them on their own recognizance put whatever reasonable condition you may. In view of above decision of the Apex Court as the appellant has been in jail for such a long time., it would be difficult for him to arrange for personal sureties for him. We, therefore direct the trial Court Judge to comply with our order. We direct that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for Rs. 20,000/-. However, he is required to appear at the police station Sadar Bazar, Jhansi after every three months. In case of failure to appear at the police station as directed above, it would be open to the authorities of the Court concerned to take steps for cancellation of his bail.;