Delhi High Court Rules Bail Conditions Cannot Impose Surveillance On Accused's Wife

The Delhi High Court in New Delhi has ruled that bail conditions cannot be imposed on the family members of an accused or convict, setting aside a trial court order that required police surveillance and monitoring of the call detail records of an accused person's wife. Justice Anup J Bhambhani observed that the law only empowers courts to impose appropriate conditions on the undertrial or convict to whom bail or suspension of sentence is being granted.

In the ruling, the high court declared that while courts can set conditions on the person receiving bail, they cannot impose such requirements on uninvolved relatives. Justice Bhambhani noted that the court cannot impose conditions on the family members of the accused or convict.

The decision came after an accused petitioner filed a plea seeking the modification of the bail conditions imposed by a trial court. The petitioner argued that the conditions requiring police surveillance of his wife and the monitoring of her call detail records represented an unacceptable invasion of her privacy. The petitioner highlighted that his wife has no concern with the FIR in question.

The high court agreed with the petitioner's arguments, terming the trial court's conditions as an unjustified invasion of privacy. In addition to setting aside these surveillance conditions, the high court extended the petitioner's interim bail for a limited period to enable the accused to attend to his wife's surgery.

During the proceedings, the prosecution opposed the extension of bail by submitting that the accused had availed of interim bail on the same ground previously, but the surgery was not conducted at that time.

However, the public prosecutor conceded that the specific conditions regarding the accused's wife were not appropriate. The prosecution admitted that the trial court's conditions amounted to unwarranted surveillance and an invasion of the privacy of the petitioner's wife.