2008 Supreme(Raj) 2136
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
K.S.Rathore, J.
Radha Kishan & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
S. B. Criminal Appeal No. 645 of 2008.
Decided On : 3-07-2008
Advocates:
For the Appellants:Amit Singh Shekhawat, Advocate.
For the State: B.S Chhaba, Public Prosecutor.
The court has the discretion to consider the status of the sureties and the interest of justice in determining the recovery amount for forfeited bail bonds.
Headnote:
Forfeiture of Bail Bonds - Reduction of Recovery Amount - The court reduced the recovery amount awarded by the trial court from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 12,500 for each surety, considering the status of the sureties and the interest of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were sureties for the accused in a case under Section 307, IPC. When the accused remained absent during trial, their bail bonds were forfeited, and the sureties were directed to deposit the entire security money of Rs. 25,000 each.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the status of the sureties, deemed it proper to reduce half of the recovery amount awarded by the trial court. The recovery of Rs. 25,000 against each appellant was reduced to Rs. 12,500 for each of them.
Issues: Forfeiture of bail bonds, reduction of recovery amount, status of sureties
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the status of the sureties and the interest of justice in reducing the recovery amount awarded by the trial court.
Final Decision: The present appeal preferred by the appellants is partly allowed, and the recovery of Rs. 25,000 against each of the appellants is reduced to half, thereby Rs. 12,500 against each of them be remitted and the rest part of the awarded recovery amount be enforced.
JUDGMENT
1. - This present Criminal Appeal is directed against the order dated 18.06.2008 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), District : Sikar whereby the bail bonds have been forfeited and appellants have been directed to deposit the entire security money to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- each.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that a FIR lodged against Kesar and Shyamlal for the offence under Section 307, IPC. The police after investigation filed charge sheet and thereafter, trial was commenced. During trial, both the accused, namely, Kesar and Shyamlal were released on bail and the present appellants gave surety to procure their appearance before the learned trial Court as and when called to do so. The appellants furnished surety bond of Rs. 25,000/-.
3. During the trial, both the accused, namely, Kesar and Shyamlal remained absent, therefore, their bail bonds were forfeited and proceedings under Section 446, Cr.P.C. was started against the sureties i.e. present appellants. The appellants (sureties) requested before the trial Court that they are poor agriculturists and looking to their status, the surety amount be reduced to half, but the request of the appellants was turned down by the trial Court vide its order dated 18.06.2008.
4. The, order impugned dated 18.06.2008 is under challenge in the present appeal.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Mansharam & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2004 (3) RCC 1388 , wherein this Court while taking lenient view reduced the forfeited amount of half and ordered to recover Rs. 5000/- instead of Rs. 10,000/-. Similar view has also been taken by this Court in the case of Bhabhooti v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2004(3) RCC 1201 .
6. I have heard learned Counsel for the appellants, learned Public Prosecutor and carefully gone through the impugned judgment dated 19.06.2008. I have also considered the ratio decided by this Court in the case of Mansharam & Ors.
7. Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and status of sureties, in the interest of justice this Court deems it proper to reduce half of the recovery amount awarded by the trial Court.
8. Consequently, the present appeal preferred by the appellants is hereby partly allowed and recovery of Rs. 25,000/- against each of the appellants is reduced to half, thereby Rs. 12,500/- against each of them be remitted and rest part of awarded recovery amount be enforced. The order dated 18.06.2008 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), District : Sikar stands modified accordingly.Appeal partly allowed.
*******
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
