Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J
DINESH KUMAR.K – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the surety bond and its forfeiture due to non-appearance. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding penalty reduction based on the forfeiture. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's decision on reducing the penalty amount. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 02nd day of March, 2026 The surety No.1 in S.C.No.773/2015 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-I, Thalassery, has filed this appeal under Section 495 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail and perused the order impugned.
3. Precisely stating, the appellant herein stood as 1st surety 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 appellant 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 learn
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
