The Supreme Court in the case Divya Bharti vs State of Bihar observed and has set aside an anticipatory bail condition imposed by Patna High Court wherein directing a Panchayat Teacher to return her salary.
The bench comprising of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice CT Ravikumar observed and has stated that such conditions are neither justified and nor required to be imposed while granting anticipatory bail.
In the present case, a Panchayat Teacher, Divya Bharti had approached the Patna High Court seeking anticipatory bail after an FIR came to be registered against her for offence under section 420, section 467, section 468, section 471, and section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A pre-arrest bail has been granted by the High Court on the condition that she will return the salary which she has received while working as a Panchayat Teacher. Further, the court directed that she shall return the entire amount drawn by her as salary in eighteen equal monthly instalments and that she shall not claim for her appointment as Panchayat Teacher.
Before the Apex Court, in a Special Leave Petition filled, this direction was questioned by her and it was contended that such onerous conditions being put by the High Court while granting pre-arrest/post-arrest bail is unsustainable.
The bench observed while setting aside this direction that this court is of the view that the additional condition of returning the amount drawn by her as salary on appointment as Panchayat Teacher is neither being justified and nor required under the law while granting of pre-arrest bail to her.
