01 Aug 2022  |   07:07am IST

Modification of bail order favouring the first land grab accused upsets victims

Adv for victims asks, how a beneficiary of more than Rs 5.78 crore not be able to pay Rs 50 lakh as personal bond; fears this will become a precedent for other accused given bail
Modification of bail order favouring the first land grab accused upsets victims

Team Herald  


ASSAGAO: Petitioners of land grabbing cases from Badem, Assagao have expressed disappointment and raised questions on modification in the bail order, of Vikrant Shetty. The personal bond of the first accused arrested by SIT in connection to a land grabbing case in Assagao was reduced from fifty lakh to fifty thousand rupees.  

Adv Christina Dias, representing victims of land grab cases said that this is an injustice to the victims because how can a culprit who is a beneficiary of more than 5.78 crore rupees cannot pay an amount of 50 lakh as a personal bond?

Shetty was placed under arrest on June 18th by SIT. Shetty had moved for bail at judicial magistrate first class court Mapusa where the court had granted him bail with a personal bond of Rs 50 lakh and surety of Rs 25 lakh each.

Shetty moved another application at Additional Sessions Court, Mapusa for modification in bail order with reducing the personal bond amount. 



Shetty had claimed in the application that he cannot afford to pay Rs 50 lakh and asked for the amount to be reduced to Rs 50,000. The Additional Sessions Court then passed an order with modification of bond amount. 

The modified bail order states, ‘The Court came to the conclusion that the accused is entitled to the benefit of bail and the surety amount should be such that the accused could be in a position to furnish surety. If the surety amount is a huge amount that the accused cannot afford, it would be a mockery of the order securing him with the bail granted by the Court. Imposing a huge surety amount on the accused who is not in a position to furnish such surety would in an indirect manner mean a denial of bail to such accused.

Adv Dias countered this “If imposing a personal bond amount which the accused cannot afford it's a mockery of the order then is this not mockery and injustice to us? I want to ask the authorities, to judiciary whether this is fair to us, the petitioners.  If not 50 lakh then it should have been reduced to a few lakhs but directly coming down to 50 thousand is a joke”, Adv Dias said.

“If this is the case then Sunil Kumar who is also arrested by SIT in the same case has also moved an application for bail. Similarly, if Sunil Kumar claims that he can afford only Rs 25,000 as a personal bond amount, will the court accept it? Sunil Kumar is beneficiary of 2.7 crores from the properties which he has transacted”, Adv Dias said.

Adv Dias further pointed out that the authorities were aware of these illegalities since the police received complaints back in the years 2013, 2019, 2020, and 2021 but nobody bothered to take action.

Dias further requested the State government to pass an order declaring all the fake sale deeds to be null and void. “All the sale deeds which are inserted are not executed before any sub-registrar. They have inserted fake sale deeds. Government should take cognizance and pass an order stating that these inserted fake sale deeds are null and void instead of we going to the court and asking the court taking one after the other sale deed to declare them as null and void,” Dias said.

“I request the Government, the law minister to look into this matter and destroy these fake deeds otherwise after some years, grandchildren of these culprits will come and say that their grandparents have got the land by the virtue of the fake sale deeds and we will be left with nothing,” Dias added.


IDhar UDHAR

IDHAR UDHAR