Interim Order 18

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
22.01.2026
Present: Sh. Ratnesh Deo, Ld. SPP for NCB.
Sh. Amar Phogat and Ms. Chaitali Gupta, Ld.
counsels for applicant/accused.
This is an application u/s 484(2) r/w Section 490
BNSS, 2023 seeking reduction of surety amount and for
depositing the cash in lieu of surety, filed on behalf of
applicant/accused.
Arguments heard.
Vide my separate order of even date, the present
application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the order be given dasti as well as be sent to
jail superintendent for supplying the same to accused in jail.
(Atul Ahlawat)
ASJ/Spl. Judge, NDPS/N Delhi
22.01.2026
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.1/6
-- 1 of 6 --
IN THE COURT OF ATUL AHLAWAT
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE /SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS),
NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS,
NEW DELHI
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
22.01.2026
ORDER
1. Vide the present order, I shall dispose off the application
filed by the applicant/accused u/s 484(2) r/w Section 490 of
BNSS, 2023 seeking reduction of surety amount and deposit of
cash in lieu of surety filed on behalf of the applicant/accused
Andrew Mwaura.
2. It has been submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the
applicant/accused that no other similar application is pending
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or the Hon’ble High
Court of Delhi.
3. It has been submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the
applicant/accused that the applicant/accused was granted regular
bail by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2025. As per the
conditions imposed in the said order, the applicant/accused was
admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.
1,00,000/- with two sureties of the like amount.
4. It has been submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the
applicant/accused that applicant/accused is a foreign national and
she is not able to procure the said surety and he is ready to
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.2/6
-- 2 of 6 --
deposit the surety amount in view of Section 490, BNSS, 2023.
5. It is fairly submitted by the Ld. SPP for NCB that he has
no objection if the present application is allowed, subject to the
applicant/accused submitting the surety amount before this Court
and furnishing a sound surety within reasonable time of her
release.
6. It is trite law that the trial court has to balance and co-
relate the imperative of setting prisoners at liberty pursuant to the
bail order and securing their fundamental rights with the demand
of producing adequate sureties as an assurance of their regular
attendance at the trial and as a deterrence against the possibility
of them fleeing from the justice. It is equally important that the
trial court should also factor the socio-economic background of
the prisoner while fixing the number and amount of sureties. At
times, persons belonging to extremely poor background, simply
do not have the requisite social standing or financial clout to
arrange multiple sureties, therefore, at times, the UTPs belonging
to poor economic strata or socially marginalized segments of the
society may not be set at liberty despite being enlarged on bail.
The purpose of sureties is certainly dissuasive in intent, however,
setting higher surety amounts and number of sureties may at time
have punitive impact instead. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India had dealt with the issue of constitutional promise of
equality for all citizens and a realistic understanding of the socio-
economic landscape of the country underlying the concept and
rationale of the scope of sureties in the cases of bail in “Moti
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.3/6
-- 3 of 6 --
Ram and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh” (1978) 4 SCC 47.
Furthermore, in the landmark decision of “Hussainara Khatoon
Vs. State of Bihar” AIR 1979 SC 1360 had mandated the
consideration of the roots of an accused in the community so as
to advocate a moot fact based approach in tune with the social
realities to serve justice as follows:
“To determine whether the accused has his roots in the
community which would deter him from fleeing, the
court should take into account the following factors
concerning the accused,
1. The length of his residence in the community.
2. His/her employment status, history and his
financial condition,
3. His family ties and relationship
4. His reputation, character and monetary
condition,
5. His prior criminal record including any
record of prior release on recognizance or
on bail,
6. The identity of responsible members of the
community who would vouch for his
reliability,
7. The nature of the offence charged and the
apparent probability of conviction and the
likely sentence in so far as these factors are
relevant to the risk of non appearance, and
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.4/6
-- 4 of 6 --
8. Any other factors in relating the ties of the
accused with the society.”
7. While dealing with similar issues, it has been held by the
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in ‘Mark Paul Obioma Vs. NCB’ ,
bail application no. 1475/2022 and in ‘Bartholomew Vs. State’,
bail application no. 1424/2023 have exercised the discretion to
reduce the bail bond amount. Furthermore, in ‘Gilbert Apeh
EmekaVs. NCB’ bail application no. 3269/2023 has directed the
petitioner therein to be released on furnishing of the personal bail
amount, instead of producing the sureties, since the petitioner
was a foreign national and no one was willing to give surety on
his behalf and the said contention was found to be plausible.
8. This court is of the view that it is a fit case to exercise its
powers u/s 484 (2) r/w 490 of BNSS, 2023 and the amount of
the personal bond and surety bond is hereby reduced to
Rs.50,000/- from Rs.1,00,000/-. In lieu of one surety, the
applicant/accused is allowed to deposit the surety amount of
Rs.50,000/- in cash or FDR before this Court, in lieu of one
surety and he shall also produce one surety in the sum of Rs.
50,000/-, within two weeks of his release. The acceptance of
cash in lieu of surety bond is allowed only for one surety and
the applicant/accused shall duly produce the second surety,
within two weeks after his release.
9. With these conditions, the present application moved under
section u/s 484 (2) r/w 490 of BNSS, 2023 on behalf of
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.5/6
-- 5 of 6 --
applicant/accused Andrew Mwaura stands disposed of. The
other conditions imposed by this Court vide order dated
05.12.2025 shall remain in force.
10. The concerned Jail Superintendent is directed to ensure
that all necessary assistance is granted to the applicant/accused
for applying the visa on-line from the Jail and to co-ordinate with
the FRRO for the purposes of the said visa.
11. It is needless to say that nothing stated herein shall
tantamount to an opinion or expression on the merits of the case.
12. Copy of this order be sent to concerned Jail
Superintendent.
13. Copy of this order be given dasti to the parties.
14. Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(ATUL AHLAWAT)
ASJ/Special Judge
(NDPS)/PHC
NDD/22.01.2026
IA 3/26 SC 398/22
NCB VS ANDREW MWAURA
Page no.6/6
-- 6 of 6 --