SHAMIM AHMED
Daya Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. List of cases has been revised and the case is being taken up in the revised call for hearing.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. This is an appeal under Section 449 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and orders dated 30.06.2008 and 02.08.2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge / Fast Track Court-III, Faizabad exercising the power under Section 446 Cr.P.C. in Criminal Misc. Case No.8 of 2008, initiated in Original Sessions Trial No.29/2008, under Sections 41/411/413 I.P.C. connected with Sessions Trial No.27 of 2008, under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, Police Station G.R.P., District Faizabad by means of which the surety bonds of the appellants have been forfeited.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the above F.I.R., the accused Ram Ashish was implicated and he was enlarged on bail by the learned court below. He further submitted that the accused is son of the servant of appellants, as such, the appellants took the surety of accused Ram Ashish and submitted the surety bonds of Rs.10,000/- each.
5. He further submitted that in the month of April, 2008, due to non appearance of accused Ram Ashish before the trial court, the learned court below is
The discharge of the accused from the offence by the trial court influenced the court's decision to set aside the orders forfeiting the surety bonds.
The discharge of the accused by the trial court influenced the court's decision to set aside the forfeiture of the surety bonds.
The court has the discretion to remit a portion of the penalty imposed on sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C. based on the interest of justice.
The obligations of a surety under Section 446 Cr.P.C. and the court's discretion to modify the sentence based on compliance and the surrender of the accused.
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 liability of sureties ends upon the accused's surrender, and unjust forfeiture of the surety amount violates principles of justice and equity.
Satisfactory explanations for non-appearance can lead to a reduction in forfeited bail amounts under Cr.P.C.
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....
Sureties are liable for forfeiture of bail bonds; penalty can be reduced at the court's discretion.
The court may reduce penalties for bail bond forfeiture upon consideration of the surety's 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.