In a critical judgment, Allahabad High Court expressed concern that arbitrary bail conditions disproportionately affect the underprivileged, who end up staying in jail for far longer periods. It underlined that trial courts must avoid ordering excessive bail conditions and take into consideration the economic condition of the accused so that poor people are not denied justice simply because they cannot afford hefty surety amounts or meet other onerous bail conditions.Background of the Case The issue came to the forefront when, in a case, an accused, though granted bail, continued to stay in jail as he could not satisfy the economic surety to come out of the jail. The accused, from a marginalized background, did not have the financial wherewithal to meet the conditions of bail laid down by the trial court, and hence, his release remained stuck, which was when litigation intervention became essential. The counsel for the appellants thus contends that the trial court has not taken into consideration the socio-economic condition of the accused persons while imposing conditions for bail. Such being the practice and process, poor people get discriminated in not being able to come out from jail despite having got bail, which situation cannot be held consistent with the principles of justice. Observations Justice Ajay Bhanot of the Allahabad High Court came down heavily on the imposition of arbitrary and disproportionate conditions for bail, which hit the poor harder than the rich. The Court ruled that while granting bail, trial courts have a duty to apply their minds and assess the financial capability of the accused before fixing sureties or imposing any other term for the grant of bail. Failure to do so amounts to the deprivation of the basic right to life and liberty entrenched in the Constitution. Justice Bhanot observed that bail being a right, the conditions should not be so oppressive and so hard as to deny its real meaning to those applicants who are not able to comply with them. The Court held that the trial courts should adopt a balancing approach in preserving the presence of the applicant before the court so that the accused does not run away, but in the process, conditions should not be such as it might hamper or practically deny the releasing of an applicant due to his or her poverty. Significance of the Judgment This judgment of the Allahabad High Court is a great pointer toward the principle of equitable justice. In this context, the intervention by the Court acts as a check and balance on the possible misuse of the conditions of bail, whereby the right to personal liberty could get restricted simply for the reason that an accused is unable to comply with them due to financial constraints. It has also brought into force that trial courts must be more humane and sensitive, particularly when dealing with people from economically weaker sections. The judgment is expected to shape more such cases in the future, and would ostensibly compel trial courts to be more considerate of the economic and social background of the accused while laying down bail condition orders. The order bears special importance for a country like India where the majority of its population comprises the underprivileged sections, and where uncalled-for bail conditions turn out to be long detention of those who cannot afford it.