SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Raj) 1020

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : H. R. Panwar
Jagdish @ Jagiya - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 308 of 2005
Decided On : 04/20/2005

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Vinod Bhadu, for the Appellants.
Mr. S.N. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor, for the State.

The Court has the discretion to consider the circumstances and reduce the penalty for forfeiture of bail bond and surety, especially when the accused's absence was due to illness and he surrendered before the trial Court.

Headnote:

Forfeiture - Bail Bond - Reduction of Penalty

Fact of the Case:

The appellants challenged the order of forfeiture of a sum of Rs.2,000/- from bail bond and surety bonds each, as the accused-appellant No.1 failed to appear during trial for offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Finding of the Court:

The trial Court had forfeited the bail bond and surety, but after the accused was acquitted and it was found that his absence was due to illness, the Court reduced the penalty from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.1,000/- for each appellant.

Issues: Forfeiture of bail bond and surety, reduction of penalty, absence of accused due to illness.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court considered the reason for the accused's absence and the fact that he surrendered before the trial Court, leading to the decision to reduce the penalty.

Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the penalty imposed against each of the appellants was reduced from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 1,000/-.

Judgment

H.R. Panwar, J.-By this appeal under Section 449, CrPC, the appellants have challenged the order dated 07.03.2005 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Sri Ganganagar (for short, “the trial Court” hereinafter), by which the trial Court forfeited a sum of Rs.2,000/-from bail bond and the surety bonds each.

2. Appellant No.1 Jagdish @ Jagiya was facing trial before the trial Court for the offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Appellants No.2 and 3 stood surety for Appellant No. 1. During trial, the accused-appellant No.1failed to put-in appearance and the trial Court forfeited the bail bond and the surety and initiated proceedings under Section 446, CrPC. On 19.02.2005, the appellants surrendered before the trial Court and filed reply to the proceedings under Section 446, CrPC. The trial Court, after hearing the parties, vide impugned order dated 07.03.2005 imposed the penalty of Rs.2000/-against each of the accused-appellants and his two sureties.

3. I have heard learned Counsel for the appellants and the Public Prosecutor for the State.

4. After trial, the Accused-appellant No.1 has already been acquitted by the trial Court. The reason assigned for his absence was that he was suffering from the ailment of dysentery. Appellants No. 2 and 3 stood sureties for the accused-appellant No.1. In Jasvender Singh vs. State, 1988 (2) RLW 595, this Court, while dealing with a similar matter in which the accused had been acquitted after trial, this Court reduced the amount of penalty from Rs.2,000/-to Rs.200/-.

5. In this view of the matter, as the Accused-appellant No.1 remained absent only on one occasion and that too on account of suffering from the ailment of dysentery and thereafter surrendered before the trial Court, I consider it just and proper to reduce the amount of the penalty.

6. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The amount of penalty imposed against each of the appellants is reduced from Rs. 2,000/-to Rs. 1,000/-. The stay petition stands disposed of .


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top