Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. Badharudeen, J
Ummer – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeal against bail bond forfeiture. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. legal liability of sureties and arguments for penalty reduction. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's discretion to reduce penalty amount. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2026 The sureties in M.C. No.2/2006 in S.C.No.24/2004 on the files of the Additional District and Sessions Court [Fast Track Court-III (Adhoc)], Manjeri, has filed this appeal under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
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 7th accused in the above case before trial court and thereafter, due to non-appearance of the 7th accused before the trial court, the bail bond executed by the appellants along with the 7th 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
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
