IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Krishna Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
By way of instant criminal appeal, challenge has been laid to order dated 16.3.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Cr.MP No. 900 of 2024 titled as State of H.P. Versus Mohammad Danish , whereby penalty to the tune of Rs.50,000/- has been imposed upon the appellant on account of his failure to cause presence of the accused in the aforesaid sessions trial.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that at the time of enlarging the accused on bail in the trial, appellant stood surety to the accused named herein above and since appellant failed to cause presence of the accused during the pend- ency of the trial, court below initiated proceedings under Section 446 Cr.PC against her. Learned court below imposed penalty to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- and issued warrant of recovery against her. In the aforesaid background, appellant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set-aside aforesaid order imposing penalty or reduce the penalty while exercising power under Section 446 of Cr.PC.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material avail
The court has discretion under Section 446 Cr.P.C to remit a portion of the penalty imposed on a surety, considering the financial situation of the surety and efforts to secure the accused's attendan....
The court has discretion to remit penalties imposed on sureties under Section 446(3), considering the circumstances of the case and ensuring a fair outcome for the surety's financial status.
Court holds that the penalty for surety bond forfeiture must consider the surety's efforts and circumstances; excessive penalties can be modified at judicial discretion.
Under Section 446(3) Cr.P.C., courts may discretionarily remit portion of penalty on forfeited surety bonds, factoring surety's sincere efforts, financial hardship and family impact, even in appeal t....
Procedure when bond has been forfeited - Without discussing application of sub-section(3) of Section 446 Cr.P.C. and benefit conferred for remission of portion of penalty, cannot be said to have forc....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the prescribed procedure under Section 446 CrPC for the forfeiture of surety bonds, including issuing show cause notic....
A surety must be afforded an opportunity to contest the imposition of a penalty for non-production of an accused, adhering to principles of natural justice.
Sureties are liable for forfeiture of bail bonds; penalty can be reduced at the court's discretion.
The court can exercise discretion to reduce penalty amounts in bond forfeiture cases based on the parties' circumstances.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.