This, apparently, is not a single such case. According to legal circles, there is an increased tendency in recent times to grant larger bail amounts by some magistrates in lower courts, especially in mofussil areas - like Thane, Kalyan, Bhiwandi - even in cases of minor offences which could attract lower amounts. While the bail amount is a factor of the gravity of the case and the antecedents of the accused and is entirely dependent on the discretion of the magistrate hearing the case, the inclination towards larger amounts, lawyers believe, is the result of a misreading of a 1998 amendment inthe surety laws of the Criminal Manual, 1980.

According to this amendment made in chapter I of the Criminal Manual, 1980, where earlier one needed a solvency certificate for standing surety in a bail amount of more than Rs 3,000, after this amendment, the bail amount has been increased to Rs 15,000. Which meant that a person standing surety for a bail amount of up to Rs 15,000 did not need to furnish a solvency certificate. Getting the solvency certificate, pointed out lawyers, was a lengthy process wherein one applies to the tehsildar, who makes enquiries with the talathi (revenue officials) who then inspect the premises of the person standing surety. If the land or house or the immovable property is, say, worth Rs 10 lakh, the tehsildar gives a solvency ceritificate allowing for the man to stand surety for a bail amount of, say, Rs one lakh.

The 1998 amendment, lawyers aver, was done to overcome this process, making it easier for the common man who stands surety. In the words of the amendment, ``Amagistrate in suitable cases where the amount of the bond does not exceed Rs 15,000, may assess the solvency of the surety even on the basis of his movable property and assets.''

``The purpose of the amendment was that the common man should not be unnecessarily harassed. As a result, after the amendment the solvency of the person standing surety for bail amounts up to Rs 15,000 could be assessed through his salary certificate or rent receipts, property tax receipts etc,'' says an advocate from Thane. He, however, complained that the sudden increase in bail amounts, immediately after the amendment, defeated the purpose. ``With bail amounts of more than Rs 15,000, those who cannot furnish a surety continue to languish in jail despite getting bail.''

They say that earlier, while in cases of minor offences like thefts, complaints of alcoholism, beating, etc an accused could be set free on a bail of around Rs 3,000 to Rs 5,000, today he gets a bail of Rs 10,000 to Rs 15,000. Accused in murder cases, whoearlier could get out on a bail amount of Rs 10,000 to Rs 15,000, now have steeper bail amounts ranging from Rs 20,000 to Rs one lakh.

However, there are lawyers who believe that increased bail amounts -- irrespective of the amendment -- are good in a society with an increasing crime graph. ``Stricter rules and larger bail amounts could help in proving to be a deterrant for offenders and serve as an example to society,'' analyses a lawyer from Bombay City Civil and Session Courts, adding, ``Also, you cannot overlook the inflation factor.''