“Bail Conditions Can't Invade Privacy Of Accused's Family”: Delhi High Court Sets Aside 'Surveillance' Directions On Wife

The Delhi High Court has observed that bail conditions cannot extend to invasion of privacy of the family members of an accused or a convict. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani set aside conditions that required police to monitor and collect personal data of wife of an accused during his interim bail.The Court modified the conditions imposed by a trial court in a case where interim bail had been granted to the accused to attend to his wife's surgery.The accused, Sandeep alias Kala, was granted interim bail by the trial court from March 16 to March 28. However, various conditions were imposed, directing the Investigating Officer (IO) to deploy lady police official to stay with his wife. The IO was also directed to take photographs of the wife and assess her living conditions, record statements of neighbours and to collect call detail records (CDRs) of both the accused and his wife. The APP submitted that the conditions so imposed may not be appropriate since they amount to unwarranted surveillance and invasion of the privacy of the accused's wife.The court was informed that the accused had already suffered judicial custody for about 4 and half years and that his jail conduct has been satisfactory.The Court observed that the conditions imposed were “wholly unacceptable intrusions on the privacy” of the wife, who was not an accused in the FIR. “Even otherwise, the law only empowers the court to impose appropriate conditions on the undertrial or the convict to whom bail/suspension of sentence is being granted; and while doing so, the court cannot impose conditions on the family members of the accused or convict,” Justice Bhambhani said. While setting aside the impugned conditions, the Court upheld the grant of interim bail and also extended the interim bail period to three weeks, commencing from April 1. The Court then imposed standard conditions, including furnishing of bond, restriction on travel, and non-interference with witnesses.It also directed the accused to submit medical records relating to his wife's surgery at the time of surrender.Title: SANDEEP @ KALA @ KALE @ SONU @ SINOTHIA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHICitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 337Click Here To Read Order

“Bail Conditions Can't Invade Privacy Of Accused's Family”: Delhi High Court Sets Aside 'Surveillance' Directions On Wife

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags