NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday criticised a strategy of GST defaulters , who undertake before high courts to deposit a substantial sum as security to get bail and then attempt to escape the commitment by moving the apex court on the ground that the onerous bail conditions were contrary to SC's consistent rulings.
"We cannot allow such persons to play ducks and drakes with the courts," SC said while dealing with an alleged defaulter who undertook before Madras HC to deposit Rs 2.5 lakh within 10 days of getting bail and then moved SC claiming that it was an onerous condition.
The bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh said, "It is becoming a common scenario where parties seek anticipatory or regular bail, offer to deposit substantial amounts and secure liberty. Thus, they foreclose the HCs from deciding the plea on merit. Thereafter, they move SC and make a grievance that the condition to deposit the amount is an onerous condition and hence illegal."
"We are not able to countenance such an approach. We strongly deprecate this practice. If an offer to deposit a substantial amount was not made at the very outset of hearing of the bail plea , the HC would have examined it on merit and decided whether the person deserves relief or not," it said.
"We are conscious of the accused person's right to liberty. But we are also equally concerned about the sanctity of the judicial process," the bench said and was ready to dismiss the accused's plea and send him back to jail.
However, senior advocate V Chitambaresh told the court the man's wife was pregnant, and he was required to take care of his ailing father and pleaded that he be given interim bail. The bench set aside HC's bail order and asked it to consider the accused's plea on merit. However, it said he would not be required to surrender till the first day of hearing before high court.
"We cannot allow such persons to play ducks and drakes with the courts," SC said while dealing with an alleged defaulter who undertook before Madras HC to deposit Rs 2.5 lakh within 10 days of getting bail and then moved SC claiming that it was an onerous condition.
The bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh said, "It is becoming a common scenario where parties seek anticipatory or regular bail, offer to deposit substantial amounts and secure liberty. Thus, they foreclose the HCs from deciding the plea on merit. Thereafter, they move SC and make a grievance that the condition to deposit the amount is an onerous condition and hence illegal."
"We are not able to countenance such an approach. We strongly deprecate this practice. If an offer to deposit a substantial amount was not made at the very outset of hearing of the bail plea , the HC would have examined it on merit and decided whether the person deserves relief or not," it said.
"We are conscious of the accused person's right to liberty. But we are also equally concerned about the sanctity of the judicial process," the bench said and was ready to dismiss the accused's plea and send him back to jail.
However, senior advocate V Chitambaresh told the court the man's wife was pregnant, and he was required to take care of his ailing father and pleaded that he be given interim bail. The bench set aside HC's bail order and asked it to consider the accused's plea on merit. However, it said he would not be required to surrender till the first day of hearing before high court.
You may also like
Gupt Navratri: Gupt Navratri will start from 26th June, what is the auspicious time for Kalash installation, know everything..
Meta Launches Gaming Accelerator In India With Top VCs
Lotus Dream Signs: If you see this favorite flower of Maa Lakshmi in your dreams... then understand that there will be rain of money..
New York votes in mayoral primary as Cuomo tries a comeback. Zohran Mamdani stands in his way
Iran-Israel conflict: Govt says monitoring situation, says airlines compelled to cancel or reroute flights
