Find a Lawyer

NAZIR HUSSAIN versus THE STATE

The Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC) was charged with forfeiture of Articles 514 and 561 bail bond for which the applicant was on bail, failed to appear in court on the dates of the hearing, A bail bond was seized and a notice of bail was issued accordingly. After failing to appear in court in response to a notice issued to him, a previous action was taken against him and he was directed to submit a forfeiture. Sternati had pleaded that the seized amount was excessive and, despite his poverty, the Serenity did not appear in court and was served regularly despite a notice to seize the bond. In different courts, Serenity took a different stand and said that no notice was taken with him, which was in fact wrong as the record shows that the notice was issued and with his personal bail Proper service was served. It was stated before the District Magistrate that he had never been a guarantor for the accused nor had he ever executed a bail bond, while in the review he stated that he was out on bail or that the accused was before the courts. In view of the changes in the guarantees guaranteed, it was clear that he did not approach the courts with a clean hand; in the circumstances, after properly defining the position of the law, the bail was confiscated in the bail, Unless in the absence of misrepresentation of evidence. There can be no exception to the arrest of bail bonds and the imposition of a fine on the accused who was eventually brought to court and charged. advocate for immigration from Naukot lawyer