Supreme Court strikes down ‘strange’ residence requirement in Delhi HC’s bail order [Read Order]

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has modified a Delhi High Court bail order by removing unusual conditions that required the accused to arrange and maintain residence in Delhi during trial proceedings.

Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih heard the criminal appeal arising from a Special Leave Petition challenging the bail conditions imposed by the Delhi High Court.

Supreme Court Removes Controversial Bail Conditions Imposed by Delhi High Court

The case involves appellant Akbal Ansari, who challenged certain conditions in the bail order granted by the Delhi High Court.

The court made significant observations about appropriate bail conditions, stating, “The High Court has recorded a finding that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

However, the High Court has imposed a strange condition of directing the appellant to arrange accommodation in Delhi and that the appellant should reside in Delhi till the conclusion of the trial. Such a condition cannot be said to be a condition of bail.”

Accused No Longer Required to Reside in Delhi During Trial, Rules Supreme Court

In its order, the Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal by setting aside condition numbers (ii), (iv), and (v) from paragraph 24 of the High Court’s order. The court instead added a new condition requiring the appellant to report to the local police station on the 1st and 15th of every calendar month between 10:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m.

The appellant was represented by Mr. M. L. Yadav, Mr. Harish Chand, Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Mr. Anant Chaittoria, Mr. Akash, Ms. Neha, and Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh as the Advocate on Record.

The respondent State was represented by Additional Solicitor General Mr. Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare, along with Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria as AOR, and advocates Mr. Prasanjeet Mohapatra, Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Mr. Vijay Awana, and Ms. Sweksha.

Case Title: Akbal Ansari v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi)

[Read Order]