Whether it is to get individuals to stand as a guarantor for a loan transaction or as a surety in a criminal proceeding, choice for a person will very often be a close relative or a longtime friend. In a criminal proceeding, circle may get narrowed to protect one’s reputation. These are hard realities of life.

To impose excessive and onerous conditions is to take away with left what is given with right. Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51 held, “imposing a condition which is impossible of compliance would be defeating very object of release.” Girish is experiencing a genuine difficulty in finding multiple sureties. Justice Krishna Iyer in Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1978) 4 SCC 47 held, “what is a Malayalee, Kannadiga, Tamil or Telugu to do if arrested in Bastar, Port Blair, Pahalgam or Chandni Chowk?” We direct, for FIRs pending in Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Girish will furnish his personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- and furnish two sureties who shall execute bonds for Rs. 30,000/- each which shall hold good for all FIRs.

– Hon’ble Justice K.V. Viswanathan, Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 149 of 2024].

_____

This Court in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2142 had following to say, “To grant bail and thereafter to impose excessive and onerous conditions is to take away with left what is given with right.”

– Hon’ble Justice K.V. Viswanathan, Suhas Chakma v. Union of India, [Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020] decided on 23.10.2024.