Supreme Court Waives Hardik Patel's Bail Condition That He Should Seek Court Permission To Go Outside Gujarat

A Bench comprising Justice Abdul Nazeer and Justice Krishna Murari allowed Patel's plea challenging Gujarat High Court's order that refused to delete the bail condition, imposed in relation to a sedition case against him.

While the Bench was initially inclined to only issue notice in the plea, it decided to allow the plea after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the State of Gujarat, submitted that the condition can be waived.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Patel said "Your lordships in Maneka Gandhi said, I've a fundamental right to go abroad."

"That condition may be waived. Provided he gives an undertaking." SG said.

Advocate Varun K Chopra, also appearing  for the petitioner suggested that the case can be closed today itself then. 

"We will allow straightaway then. Mr Mehta we can record your statement then?" the Bench asked. 

" Your Lordships can, your Lordships may pass an order. Whichever way" SG said.

"We'll pass a court order. Waived and allowed. We'll pass order later." Bench said.

The impugned condition was imposed by the Sessions Court in January 2020 while granting bail to Patel after a non bailable warrant was issued against him in relation to the 2015 'Patidar Agitation' case.

In September 2020, his plea for deletion of the bail condition was dismissed by the lower Court following which he challenged the decision before the Gujarat High Court.

The High Court in its impugned order dated 10th March 2021 had observed that the condition imposed is reasonable condition and does not bar completely the petitioner from travelling, but only to seek permission of the Court if he has to travel beyond the jurisdiction of the State. Therefore when the petitioner desires to travel out of Gujarat, the trial Court would be able to assess the stage of trial and then consider urgency in the petitioner's case for travellling out of Gujarat and then pass necessary orders which will ensure control of the trial Court for the progress in the trial.

The High Court, while refusing to waive the bail condition, had observed that the conduct of trial is ultimately in exclusive domain of the trial Court and therefore, it will always be open for the trial Court to impose a reasonable condition guided by the judgments pronounced from time to time by the Apex Court in this connection.

Further, according to the High Court, the condition impugned, did not appear to be arbitrary or fanciful or it extends beyond the ends of provision.