Path: Home » NEWS against MEN » 498A/ Domestic Violence » Supreme Court Removes Bail Condition Requiring Husband to Pay ₹9 Lakh Compensation

Supreme Court Removes Bail Condition Requiring Husband to Pay ₹9 Lakh Compensation

Supreme Court Removes Bail Condition Requiring Husband to Pay ₹9 Lakh

The Supreme Court recently overturned a Jharkhand High Court ruling that required a husband, accused under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for cruelty, to pay ₹9 lakh as interim compensation to his estranged wife as a condition for anticipatory bail.

Court’s Ruling on Bail Condition

A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti ruled that the Jharkhand High Court was not justified in imposing such a condition on the husband, Rohit Jaiswal. The Supreme Court stated in its September 27 order:

“We believe the High Court was wrong in requiring the appellant, Rohit Jaiswal, to deposit ₹9 lakh as interim compensation. This condition is removed. However, we have not interfered with the grant of anticipatory bail or other conditions imposed.”

Increase in Maintenance Amount

During the proceedings, the Supreme Court suggested an increase in maintenance payments. The husband agreed to raise the amount from ₹4,000 to ₹10,000 per month. The Court then directed that the payments continue as per this agreement.

“The maintenance amount is being increased to ₹10,000 per month based on the appellant’s statement. If the appellant fails to pay, the wife (respondent no. 2) can seek legal action for execution before the trial court.”

Modification of Maintenance by Trial Court

The Supreme Court also clarified that the trial or appellate court could later modify, increase, or reduce the maintenance amount based on the circumstances.

Case Background

The case involved Rohit Jaiswal, who had filed an appeal against the Jharkhand High Court’s April 2022 ruling. The High Court had granted him anticipatory bail but included the condition that he must pay ₹9 lakh as compensation. The Supreme Court has now removed this requirement while keeping other bail conditions unchanged.

This ruling reaffirms that financial compensation should not be a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail in criminal cases.

Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *