Madras High Court Modifies Onerous Bail Conditions in Electro-Homeopathy College Case

Court Criticizes Indefinite Monetary Bail Requirements, Prescribes Administrative Relief for Affected Students

The Madras High Court, in a significant ruling on November 20, 2025, addressed the contentious bail conditions imposed on Tikat Jackson @ Diccot Jeckson, the principal of "Tamil Nadu College" at Aruppukottai, accused of running unrecognized Electro-Homeopathy courses. The court reviewed conditions attached to the bail, deeming some as excessively punitive and beyond the legitimate scope of bail requirements.

Justice L. Victoria Gowri presided over the case, which challenged the conditions set by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar. These conditions included a directive to deposit Rs. 40 lakhs with the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) for refunding student fees, with an additional condition for ongoing deposits based on requirements. The court found the latter condition to be open-ended and devoid of judicial purpose, effectively transforming bail into a restitution mechanism.

The judgment highlighted that bail conditions must not be punitive or prejudge liability, but rather ensure the presence of the accused and the integrity of the investigation. Citing precedents from the Supreme Court, the court emphasized that conditions resembling recovery or compensation are impermissible.

Justice Gowri ordered the retention of certain bail conditions with modifications, directing that the remaining Rs. 10.20 lakhs be placed in an interest-bearing deposit linked to the crime number. The DLSA was tasked with facilitating claims from students wishing to withdraw, ensuring procedural fairness without further financial impositions on the petitioner.

Moreover, the court underscored the broader issue of policy limbo regarding Electro-Homeopathy courses, urging state-wide verification and uniform enforcement to prevent selective action against institutions. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare was advised to expedite policy conclusions to resolve ongoing uncertainties.

The ruling offers a nuanced approach, balancing the protection of student interests with the rights of the accused, while calling for policy clarity in the education and recognition of alternative medicine systems.

Bottom Line:

Bail conditions cannot be punitive, compensatory, or such as to pre-adjudge liability; open-ended monetary exactions as bail conditions are impermissible. Bail conditions should secure presence of the accused, ensure non-tampering, and prevent repetition of offences.

Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Tikat Jackson @ Diccot Jeckson v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2811475