N. S. SHEKHAWAT
Rawel Singh – Appellant
Versus
Punjab State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. N.S. Shekhawat J.: - The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to set aside the order dated 13.11.1999 passed by the Court of Sh. Gurnam Singh, the then Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby a penalty of Rs.50,000/- i.e. the amount of surety bond, was imposed on him and the same was ordered to be recovered from him as arrear of land revenue.
2. As per the case set up by the prosecution, on 26.08.1999, Baljinder Singh accused was granted the concession of interim bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount and was directed to surrender before the Trial Court on 24.09.1999.The appellant and one more person namely Meet Singh had stood sureties for Baljinder Singh in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each. However, on 24.09.1999, Baljinder Singh did not surrender in the Court and his bail bonds and surety bonds were cancelled and forfeited to the State and was ordered to be summoned through non-bailable warrants. However, notice was issued to the appellant and another surety to produce Baljinder Singh, accused. As per the prosecution, the appellan
A surety cannot be penalized without being given a show cause notice and without the trial court recording grounds for forfeiture, as per the principles of natural justice.
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.
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....
Sureties remain liable for penalties upon bail bond forfeiture due to the accused's non-appearance, irrespective of subsequent production of the accused.
The court has discretion to reduce penalty amounts imposed on sureties for bail bonds under specific circumstances.
The court upheld the forfeiture of bail bonds but reduced the penalty amount due to the appellants' financial circumstances.
A surety bond is unenforceable without a corresponding personal bond from the accused, as per S. 499 CrPC.
Sureties are liable for forfeiture of bail bonds; penalty can be reduced at the court's discretion.
Sureties are bound to pay penalty upon bail bond forfeiture; subsequent production of the accused does not negate this obligation.
The court emphasized the importance of the appellant's cooperation and provision of detailed information in the trial court's decision regarding the forfeiture of the surety bond and issuance of a wa....
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.