Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Revision No. 139 of 1980, decided on 19th April, 1982.
‑‑--S. 514‑Surety bond, forfeiture of‑Accused persons not abscond ed during entire trial‑Petitioner standing surety not for any mone tary consideration‑Forfeiture of amount, reduced, in circum stances.
Dildar v. State P L D 1963 S C 47 ref.
Imam Ali Kazi for Appellant.
Nazeer Alam for the State.
Date of bearing : 19th April, 1982. y'
The learned Advocate for the applicant submitted, that he is pressing the above revision application in respect of the quantum of the forfeited surety bond, in view of the case reported in P L D 1963 S C 47. The learned Advocate on the basis of the earlier referred decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court submitted, that as there is nothing on record to Show that the applicant stood surety for monetary considerations, but in fact he being neighbour out of benevolent considerations, be stood surety for the five accused persons in question and as such the amount of surety bond forfeited ought to be reasonable, keeping in view the observations of the Hon ble Supreme Court, in the earlier mentioned case.
2. The learned Advocate appearing for the State submitted, that it is true, there is nothing on record to show, that the applicant stood surety for monetary consideration and as such the forfeiture of the entire surety bond is not called for and therefore he submitted that amount of forfeiture may be reduced.
3. Keeping in view the above submissions, made by the learned counsel and also the fact that the accused persons did not abscond during the entire trial and regularly appeared before the learned trial Court and in the absence of anything on record to show, that applicant stood surety for any monetary consideration, I would reduce the forfeiture amount of each bond from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 3,000 only, but would otherwise maintain the impugned order.
4. The above revision application stands disposed of in terms of the above order.
Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer