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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 3466

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J
MUSTHAFA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K. RAKESH
For the Respondents: SMT.ANIMA M

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 27th day of January, 2026 The sureties in S.C.No.285/2023 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Pattambi, has filed this appeal under Section

495 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail and perused the order impugned.

3. Precisely stating, the appellants herein stood as sureties for releasing the accused in this case before trial court and thereafter, due to non-appearance of the accused before the trial court, the bail bond executed by the appellants along with the accused has been forfeited.

4. As held in Thundichi v. State of Kerala [2009(4) KLT 67] , on forfeiture of the bond, the accused would be produced by the sureties or the accused was later arrested would not save the sureties from paying the forfeited amount of penalty, though leniency in the quantum of penalty can be considered. Thus, the learned counsel for the appellants pleaded mercy in the matter of penalty, under the submission that the appellants are doing coolie works. The learned Public Prosecutor conceded for reasonable deduction in the penalty pointing out the fact that the actu

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