SupremeToday Landscape Ad
AI Thinking

AI Thinking...

Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!

Analysing the retrieved Case Laws

Scanned Judgements…!


AI Overview

AI Overview...

  • Provision of bond of good behaviour - Main points and insights:
  • Under Malaysian law, a bond of good behaviour is primarily a security measure to ensure the individual maintains good conduct, not a punitive measure. The law distinguishes between bonds for keeping peace (section 107, Cr.P.C.) and bonds for maintaining good behaviour (section 109, Cr.P.C.) ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 530"], ["2023 1 Supreme 570"].
  • Violation of a bond for good behaviour does not automatically invoke provisions for imprisonment under sections 122(1)(b) or 123(1)(b) Cr.P.C. Instead, the primary consequence is the forfeiture of the bond, unless specific provisions or procedures are followed ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 530"], ["2022 0 Supreme(MP) 325"], ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2479"].
  • Courts generally lack jurisdiction to impose imprisonment solely for breach of a good behaviour bond unless explicitly authorized by law, and proceedings must follow proper legal procedures, including service of notices and opportunity to be heard ["2022 0 Supreme(MP) 325"], ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2479"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 56344"].
  • Cases have clarified that mere involvement in subsequent criminal cases does not constitute breach of a good behaviour bond, and enforcement actions like forfeiture or imprisonment require strict adherence to procedural law ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2479"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52979"].
  • The law does not recognize administrative bodies like Boards of Directors (BOD) as having legal authority to impose or enforce bonds of good behaviour; such bodies are only considered administrative entities without legal power to create or enforce bonds [](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/MY_MLRA_2021_4_MLRA_29), ["

    FAEKAH HAJI HUSIN & ORS vs MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR (PEMERBADANAN) - Federal Court

    "].
  • Improper or unlawful procedures, such as failure to serve notices or exceeding jurisdiction, render actions like detention or forfeiture of bonds invalid, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 56344"], ["2022 0 Supreme(MP) 325"].
  • In cases where bonds are executed for good behaviour, breaches are typically addressed through forfeiture or proceedings in accordance with the law, not through arbitrary detention or imprisonment without proper legal basis ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2479"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52955"].

  • Analysis and Conclusion:

  • The Malaysian law on bonds of good behaviour emphasizes that such bonds are administrative and security measures, not criminal punishments. Imprisonment or detention for breach is only permissible when explicitly provided for by law and following due process.
  • Courts have consistently held that violations of good behaviour bonds do not automatically trigger criminal sanctions like imprisonment unless specific statutory provisions are invoked, and procedural safeguards are observed.
  • There is a clear legal distinction between bonds for keeping peace and bonds for maintaining good behaviour, with the latter primarily subject to forfeiture rather than imprisonment.
  • Administrative bodies such as BODs lack inherent legal authority to create or enforce bonds of good behaviour; their role is limited to administrative oversight within the bounds of law.
  • Cases highlight the necessity of procedural correctness—proper service, opportunity to be heard, and lawful notices—before taking actions against individuals for breach of bonds.
  • Actions beyond the scope of law, such as detention without proper authority or unlawful forfeiture, are invalid and subject to legal challenge.

References:- ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 530"]- ["

PP vs CINNARAJ SREEDARAN - High Court

"]- [](https://supremetoday.ai/doc/judgement/MY_MLRA_2021_4_MLRA_29)- ["

FAEKAH HAJI HUSIN & ORS vs MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR (PEMERBADANAN) - Federal Court

"]- ["2023 1 Supreme 570"]- ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 2479"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 56344"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52979"]- ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52955"]
Enforceability Limitations on Bonds of Good Behaviour under Malaysian CrPC Sections 110 and 117

Bond of Good Behaviour in Malaysia: Cases Not Covered

In the realm of Malaysian criminal law, the bond of good behaviour serves as a preventive measure to ensure individuals maintain proper conduct. But what exactly does this entail, and crucially, what cases are not under the bond of good behaviour (BOD) under Malaysian law? This question often arises for those navigating criminal proceedings, and understanding its scope can prevent misconceptions.

Typically governed by the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), these bonds aim to curb potential misconduct without immediate incarceration. However, they are not a catch-all remedy. This post delves into the provisions, distinctions, applicability, and notably, scenarios where such bonds do not apply—drawing from statutory frameworks and case law for a comprehensive view. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.

Legal Framework for Bonds of Good Behaviour

Under Malaysian law, bonds of good behaviour are primarily outlined in Sections 110 and 117 of the Cr.P.C.2023 1 Supreme 570. Section 117 distinguishes between two types: bonds for keeping the peace and those for maintaining good behaviour. As stated, If upon inquiry, it is proved that it is necessary for keeping the peace or maintaining good behaviour, as the case may be... indicating they are not interchangeable 2023 1 Supreme 570.

Prescribed forms reinforce this: Form No.12 for peace bonds and Form No.13 for good behaviour bonds 2023 1 Supreme 570. These are executed following specific proceedings, ensuring procedural fairness.

  • Key distinction: Bonds for good behaviour target habitual offenders or those deemed a risk to community safety, per Section 110.
  • Duration: Typically up to three years, as the magistrate deems fit 2023 1 Supreme 570.

Applicability and Initiation of Proceedings

These bonds apply only within statutory proceedings under Sections 107, 110, or 117 Cr.P.C.2023 1 Supreme 570. For example, in Malar @ Malarkodi, the court held that a bond under Section 110 is strictly for good behaviour, and breach does not trigger Section 122(1)(b), which applies solely to peace bonds 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3685.

Similarly, Karthigayan @ Pallukarthik emphasized this separation: Section 122(1)(b) does not extend to good behaviour bond breaches 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 1656. Proceedings require an inquiry, notice (via Section 111), and proof of necessity.

From analogous discussions in related jurisprudence, such as under Indian CrPC (mirroring Malaysian provisions), Section 110 targets a person who is by habit a robber, house-breaker, thief... or is so desperate and dangerous as to render his being at large without security hazardous to the community 2018 0 Supreme(Mad) 2774. This underscores the preventive, not punitive, nature.

Cases Not Under the Bond of Good Behaviour

Not every instance of misconduct triggers a good behaviour bond. Applicability hinges on statutory initiation—outside this, they do not apply. Key examples include:

  • Civil or contractual disputes: These fall under civil law, not Cr.P.C. provisions 2022 3 Supreme 618.
  • Bonds not in prescribed form: Improperly executed bonds cannot be forfeited under Section 514 Cr.P.C. 2022 3 Supreme 618.
  • Pre-existing or non-statutory bonds: Historical bonds from the British Raj era or those outside Cr.P.C. are unenforceable as good behaviour bonds 1957 0 Supreme(SC) 73.

In one case, bonds by sureties were deemed invalid due to form issues, highlighting strict compliance 2022 3 Supreme 618. Furthermore, cases like illicit liquor possession do not automatically prove bond breach without inquiry 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 52976.

Other contexts exclude these bonds:- Bail conditions: Onerous good behaviour bonds in bail are often invalid if unfulfillable 2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 5722.- Chapter VIII proceedings arrests: No provision for arrest upon initiation; only bond execution post-inquiry 2014 0 Supreme(Bom) 1481.- Arms Act or similar licensing: Prior bonds noted but governed separately 2007 0 Supreme(All) 2653.

In Devi's case under NDPS Act, a good behaviour bond under Section 110 was held outside Section 122(1)(b)'s ambit, protecting Article 21-like liberties 2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 2101. Courts quashed orders misapplying provisions, noting Section 122(1)(b) is not attracted when the bond was executed for maintaining good behaviour 2018 0 Supreme(Mad) 2774.

Breach and Enforcement Limitations

Breaches of good behaviour bonds lead to forfeiture or specific penalties under Sections 122 and 117, but not imprisonment like peace bonds 2023 1 Supreme 570. Jurisprudence stresses civil liability only: the Legislature had thought it fit to mulct a person who commits breach of good behaviour bond only with civil liability, viz., forfeiture of the bond amount and not imprisonment 2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 2101.

If acquitted of the underlying act, no retroactive imprisonment applies. Exceptions demand proper notice and inquiry 2018 0 Supreme(Mad) 2774.

Practical Recommendations

When facing potential proceedings:- Verify if Sections 110/117 apply; otherwise, alternative remedies like civil suits prevail.- Ensure bonds match prescribed forms for enforceability 2022 3 Supreme 618.- In bail or licensing, distinguish from Cr.P.C. bonds

INDCAL00000265096

2007 0 Supreme(All) 2653.

For instance, in obscene words conviction post-bond, forfeiture followed default, but only within framework

PEMADASA v. DAVID

.

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

The provision of bond of good behaviour under Malaysian law is confined to Cr.P.C. Sections 110 and 117 proceedings, distinct from peace bonds. Cases not under BOD include civil matters, non-statutory bonds, and improper forms—ensuring targeted application 2023 1 Supreme 570.

Key takeaways:- Bonds require specific initiation and form compliance.- Breaches incur forfeiture, not automatic jail.- Outside Cr.P.C., other laws govern.

Stay informed on these nuances to navigate Malaysian criminal law effectively. For personalized guidance, seek professional legal counsel.

References

  1. 2023 1 Supreme 570: Distinction between peace and good behaviour bonds.
  2. 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 3685: Section 110 bonds not under 122(1)(b).
  3. 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 1656: Reinforces bond distinctions.
  4. 2022 3 Supreme 618: Invalid forms and civil contexts.
  5. 2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 2101, 2018 0 Supreme(Mad) 2774: Breach remedies and exclusions.
#MalaysianLaw, #GoodBehaviourBond, #CrPCSections
Chat Download
Chat Print
Chat R ALL
Landmark
Strategy
Argument
Risk
Chat Voice Bottom Icon
Chat Sent Bottom Icon
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
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 Back to top