Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Farjand Ali, J.
Aadesh Devkumar S/o Sh. Devkumar And Other – Appellant
Versus
Raunak Doshi S/o Sh. Bhim Singh Ji Doshi & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 191 of 2022 Connected with S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 192 of 2022 Connected with S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 193 of 2022
Decided On : 27-01-2022
Section 446 of Cr.P.C. - Forfeiture of bail bonds - Accused facing trial for offence under Negotiable Instruments Act - Direction to appear before Trial Court and move regular bail application
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was facing trial for an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Due to failing to appear before the trial court, bail bonds were forfeited, and proceedings under Section 446 and Sections 82-83 of Cr.P.C. were initiated.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the petitioner to appear before the trial court and move a regular bail application along with an explanation of the proceedings under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. The court also stayed the effect and operation of the previous order.
Issues: Forfeiture of bail bonds, initiation of proceedings under Section 446 and Sections 82-83 of Cr.P.C., direction to appear before trial court and move regular bail application
Ratio Decidendi: Since the offence was bailable and the accused was willing to appear before the trial court, the court directed the petitioner to move a regular bail application and stay the effect of the previous order.
Final Decision: The miscellaneous petition was disposed of accordingly, and the stay petition was also disposed of. The accused was directed to appear before the trial court and move a regular bail application, and the effect of the previous order was stayed.
ORDER
1. By way of these miscellaneous petitions, petitioners have been made challenge to the orders dated 25.08.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate in Criminal Cases No.100/2020, 272/2020 and 172/2020 titled as ’Raunak Dosi vs. Aadesh Dev Kumar’ whereby the learned Magistrate initiated proceedings under Section 446 of the Cr.P.C. and also directed to open proceedings under Section 82-83 of the Cr.P.C.
2. What transpires from the petition and the annexures is that the petitioner is facing trial for the accusation of committing offence punishable under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Due to failing in marking presence before the learned trial court on the due date, his bail bonds were forfeited and therefore, proceedings under Section 446 as well as under Section 82-83 of Cr.P.C. have been directed to be initiated.
3. Since the matter pertains to a bailable offence and the accused-petitioners are ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court and willing to face the course of trial, therefore, instead of quashing the order impugned, it is deemed appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the learned Trial Court on or before 25.02.2022 and move a regular bail application alongwith reply-cum-explanation of proceedings under Section 446 of Cr.P.C.
4. In the event the accused-petitioner appears and move a regular bail application, the learned Trial Court shall release the accused-petitioner on the very same day provided he furnishes bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. He shall deposit the entire amount of bond under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. with the learned Trial Court on the very same day i.e 25.02.2022.
5. Meanwhile, the effect and operation of order dated 25.08.2021 shall remain stayed.
6. This miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.
The stay petition is also disposed of.
7. A copy of this order shall separately be attached in all three petitions.
The court has the discretion to direct the accused to appear before the trial court and move a regular bail application in cases of bailable offences.
Cancellation of bail without a hearing violates due process under the law.
The court exercises inherent powers to restore bail based on exceptional circumstances caused by representation failures.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of correctly interpreting legal provisions and ensuring jurisdictional compliance in granting bail.
The court established that the right to bail can be granted even in cases of prior absconding, provided the accused demonstrates a commitment to participate in the judicial process.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
