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

1950 Supreme(Ori) 45

RAY
GOVINDA CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.N.DAS

RAY, C. J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner (Gobinda Chandra Srichanar) has been declared to have forfeited the bail bond executed by him to ensure attendance of accused Bira naik in Criminal Case No. 389, started by Maguni Biswal of Dhenkanal. On 161-1950, which was one of the dates of hearing, the accused Bira Naik did not attend the Court, and the petitioner, his bailor, fully alive to his responsibility made a representation to the Court that the non-appearing accused was ill. The learned Magistrate did not accept the story of illness but however, was forced to adjourn the case to 30-1-1950. On that date, the accused appeared, and the bailor too appeared and filed a petition asking to be released from the liability govinda Chandra vs. State (04. 08. 1950 -ORIHC) Page 2 of 5 of bail bond. It appears from the record that one Banshi Naik executed a bail bond for Bira Naik on 3-3-1950. The petitioner was called upon to show cause why the surety bond should not be forfeited and the payment of Rs. 200 agreed under the bond to be paid in default of the accused's attendance in Court, should not be enforced.

( 2 ) BOTH the Courts below have disbelieved the story of Bira Naik's illness on 161-1950










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top