Delhi District CourtAnil Agarwal vs Sunita Bardia on 23 December, 2020IN THE COURT OF SH. LAL SINGH\n          ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE ­05,\n     WEST DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURTS DELHI.\n\nCR.No. 73/2020\n\nAnil Agarwal\nS/o late Sh.Moti Lal Agarwal\nR/o S­206, 1st Floor,\nPanchsheel Park,\nDelhi­110 017\n                                               ....... Petitioner\n\n             Vs.\n\nSunita Bardia\nW/o Sh. Vikas Bardia\nR/o 12/3, Punjabi Bagh (East)\nDelhi­ 110 026                               ....... Respondent\n\nDate of institution                   : 24.02.2020\nDate when reserved for Order          : 16.12.2020\nDate of Order                         : 23.12.2020\n\nORDER :1.           This revision petitionu/s 397/401Cr.P.C. r/wsection\n440(2)Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner against the\nimpugned order dt. 25.01.2020 vide which while admitting the\npetitioner on bail, ld. MM­05, West, THC/Trial Court, directed\nthe petitioner to furnish personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.\n1,50,000/­ with one surety in the like amount in CC no.\n12041/2018, titled as Sunita Bardia Vs. Anil Agarwal.2.           The relevant facts of the case are that theCR No. 73/2020                                    Page No. 01 of 07respondent/complainant has filed a criminal complaintu/s 138of\nN.I.Act, against the petitioner arraying him as an accused in the\nsaid complaint pertaining to the dishonor of cheque bearing no.\n000300 dated 12.07.2018, drawn on RBL Bank Ltd. for a sum of\nRs. 25,00,000/­ (Rupees twenty five lacs only) issued by the\npetitioner/accused.3.           It   is   submitted   in   the   petition     that       the\npetitioner/accused appeared before the ld. Trial Court on\n25.01.2020 and since the offenceu/s 138of N.I.Act is bailable\nand accordingly the petitioner/accused was admitted on bail by\nthe ld. Trial     Court vide order dt. 25.01.2020. It is further\nsubmitted in the petition that ld. Trial Court while admitting the\npetitioner on bail, directed to the petitioner/accused to furnish a\npersonal bond for a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/­ with one surety of the\nlike amount.      Petitioner contended in the instant petition that\nsurety bond amount was exorbitant and was beyond the\nimagination of the petitioner. It is also contended that though the\npetitioner was prepared with the surety amount of Rs. 25,000/­\n(FDR).     It is further contended that petitioner as well as his\ncounsel orally requested to the ld. Trial Court to reduce the\namount of surety bond but the ld. Trial Court did not accept the\nsaid request and accepted the personal bond of the petitioner till\nthe next date of hearing and directed the petitioner to furnish\nsurety bond for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/­.4.           The present revision petition has been filed on theCR No. 73/2020                                    Page No. 02 of 07ground, amongst other ground that the offence alleged against the\npetitioner is bailable offence and the cardinal principle of law is\nthat accused has a right to be admitted on bail and Court cannot\nput harsh conditions for release of the accused on bail in bailable\noffence. The impugned order is also challenged on the ground\nthat the said order has caused great prejudice to the petitioner as\nsame is very harsh, onerous and burdensome and if the said order\nis not complied with due to difficulty in arranging the surety, the\nright to bail in bailable offences would be defeated. Petitioner\nprays that the present revision petition may be allowed and may\ndirect the ld. Trial Court to either admit the petitioner on bail only\non furnishing personal bond or reduce the amount of the surety\nbond to a reasonable amount.5.           I have heard the arguments.6.           Sh. Tarun Bedi, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner\nsubmitted that while admitting the petitioner/accused on bail, the\nld. Trial Court has imposed very harsh condition directing the\npetitioner/accused to furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.\n1,50,000/­ and the surety bond in the like amount.             He also\nsubmitted that the petitioner/accused is facing great difficulty in\narranging the surety as the surety amount in the sum of\nRs.1,50,000/­ is highly exorbitant and hence, the surety amount\nmay be reduced.7.           Sh. Vijender Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the respondent\nsubmitted that there is no infirmity in the order dated 25.01.2020,CR No. 73/2020                                     Page No. 03 of 07passed by the ld. Trial Court particularly in the circumstances that\ncheque amount was of Rs.25,00,000/­ and moreover, the\npetitioner resides in Dubai and hence, surety amount may not be\nreduced.8.           I have considered the above submissions and perused\nthe Trial Court record.9.           In the instant matter, respondent/complainant Sunita\nBardia has filed a complaint caseu/s 138of N.I. Act against the\nPetitioner/accused, alleging that the accused had approached the\ncomplainant through Sh. Puneet Banthia for a friendly loan of\nRupees twenty five lacs. Thereafter, respondent/ complainant had\npaid a loan of Rs.25,00,000/­ through RTGS on 22.09.2016 and\nthe petitioner/accused has executed a Promissory note in favour\nof the respondent/complainant, promising that the same would be\nhonoured. It is also stated in the complaint that on the same day,\npetitioner/accused issued two cheques i.e. Cheque bearing no.\n000299 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/­ towards interest of the loan\namount for a period of 120 days and another post dated cheque\nbearing no. 000300 for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/­ drawn from\nRatnakar Bank Ltd., Hauz Khas, Delhi for discharge of his legal\nliability towards the said principal amount of loan.As per the complaint, the petitioner/accused assured\nthe complainant that the cheque bearing no. 000300 for a sum of\nRs.25,00,000/­ would be honoured on its presentation on dated\n12.07.2018. However, the said cheque bearing no. 000300 wasCR No. 73/2020                                    Page No. 04 of 07dishonoured vide cheque returning memo dated 13.07.2018 with\nthe remarks 'fund insufficient'.10.          Ld. Trial Court vide order dated 25.01.2020 admitted\nthe petitioner/accused on bail subject to furnishing of bail bond in\nthe sum of Rs.1.5 lacs with one surety of the like nature.\nHowever, on that day, the petitioner/accused has furnished the\npersonal bond and ld. Trial Court accepted the same till the next\ndate of hearing. The petitioner/accused sought time from the ld.\nTrial Court for furnishing surety bond and same was granted by\nthe ld. Trial Court. However, thereafter, the petitioner/accused\nhas preferred the present revision petition against the order dated\n25.01.2020.11.          The petitioner/accused also stated to be residing in\nDubai. This fact has not been disputed by the ld. Counsel for the\npetitioner/accused. Moreover, perusal of the trial court record\nshows that on 01.11.2019, ld. Trial Court while cancelling\nbailable warrant against the petitioner/accused, directed the\npetitioner/accused to file his Dubai address on record. Further,\nperusal of the file shows that on 10.01.2020, exemption\napplication was moved on behalf of the petitioner/accused before\nthe ld. Trial Court stating therein that the petitioner/accused has to\nvisit Dubai for his professional requirements and at present, he is\nin Dubai. Thus, there is force in the contention of the ld. Counsel\nfor the respondent/complainant that the petitioner/accused is also\nreside in Dubai.CR No. 73/2020                                     Page No. 05 of 0712.          Though the bail bond and surety bond should not be\nexorbitant and excessive as these bonds are just to secure the\npresence of the accused during the trial etc., however, at the same\ntime so as to ensure the presence of the accused, it is the\ndiscretion of the concerned Court to take sound surety, keeping in\nview the nature of offence as well as facts & circumstances of the\ncase. In the instant case, the petitioner/accused is stated to be\nvisiting Dubai for his professional requirements. Moreover, in the\napplication as filed by the petitioner/accused before the ld. Trial\nCourt for cancellation of bailable warrant, it is stated that the\naddresses of the petitioner/accused as mentioned in the complaint\nwere jointly owned by the petitioner/accused with his brother and\nnow the petitioner/accused has left the New Friends Colony\naddress and he has no connection with the said address. It is also\nmentioned in the said application for cancellation of B/W that the\npetitioner/accused may be allowed to furnish his new address i.e.\nS­206, First Floor, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi­110017, where\nhe has made necessary arrangement to receive all the\ncommunications.13.          Thus, it is amply clear that the petitioner/accused is\nalso residing in Dubai and in Delhi, he has made new\narrangements to receive all the communications etc. Accordingly,\nkeeping in view the status of the petitioner/accused as well as\nconsidering the nature of allegations, the order dated 25.01.2020\npassed by the ld. Trial Court thereby while admitting theCR No. 73/2020                                    Page No. 06 of 07petitioner/accused on bail, directing the petitioner/accused to\nfurnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.1.5 lacs and surety bond in\nthe like nature is quite reasonable and it is not exorbitant or\nexcessive in any manner particularly, in view of the above facts &\ncircumstances.14.          Therefore, in view of the facts & circumstances as\ndiscussed above, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order\ndated 25.01.2020 as passed by ld. Trial Court and same does not\nrequire any interference. As such, the present revision Petition\ndeserves to be dismissed. Revision petition is accordingly\ndismissed.15.              Trial Court record be sent back alongwith copy of this\nOrder.16.          After due compliance, Revision file be consigned to\nrecord room.                        Digitally\n                                    signed by LAL\n                      LAL           SINGH\n                                    Date:SINGH         2020.12.23\n                                    16:20:47\n                                    +0530\nAnnounced in the open court                       (LAL SINGH)On this 23rd December, 2020.                   ASJ­05(W)/THC/Delhi\n                                                 23.12.2020CR No. 73/2020                                        Page No. 07 of 07