Mohan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Mohan Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Appeal allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Oct 22, 2002

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/773162

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/773162
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Khem Chand Sharma, J.
Decided On: Oct 22, 2002
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 956 of 2002
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Appeal allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 439(2), 446, 446(3) & 449--For failure of amount of surety--Bail was cancelled on 29.9.2002--Proceedings to forfeiure amount of surety initiated on 13.6.2001 and forfeited on 17.7.2001--Application moved under Section 446(3) on 3.6.2002 dismissed--Hence appeal under Secti...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Appeal allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohan Singh

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 2003(1)WLN107

Excerpt

criminal procedure code, 1973 - sections 439(2), 446, 446(3) & 449--for failure of amount of surety--bail was cancelled on 29.9.2002--proceedings to forfeiure amount of surety initiated on 13.6.2001 and forfeited on 17.7.2001--application moved under section 446(3) on 3.6.2002 dismissed--hence appeal under section 449 cr.p.c.--held, after cancellation of bail bond neither there was any occasion nor it was legally permissible to initiate proceedings under section 446--rejection of application moved under section 446(3) cannot be sustained--appellant surety entitled to get refund of amount of surety--impugned order of 3.6.2002 quashed and set aside.;appeal allowed - khem chand sharma, j.1. at the joint request, i have heard learned counsel for the parties for final disposal of this appeal at the admission stage.2. in this case, the bail granted to accused ram lakchan on 8.2.2000 was cancelled by the learned sessions judge dholpur vide order dated 29.9.2000 on an application moved under section 439(2) cr.p.c. the revision petition preferred against the order cancelling the bail was moved, but the same was dismissed by this court on 7.5.2002.3. it may also be noted that vide order dated 13.6.2001, the trial court initiated proceedings under section 446 cr.p.c. against the appellant surety of accused ram lakchan and vide order dated 17.7.2001, the learned trial court forfeited the amount of surety bond.4. this appeal under section 449 cr.p.c. has been preferred by the appellant, who stood surety of accused ram lakchan seeking to challenge the order dated 3.6.2002 passed by the learned trial court whereby the application of the appellant filed under section 446(3) cr.p.c. was dismissed.5. it appears that the bail bonds were cancelled on 29.9.2002 and after cancellation of the bail bonds neither there was any occasion nor it was legally permissible to initiate proceedings under section 446 cr.p.c. against the appellant surety. in this view of the matter, the impugned order rejecting the application of the appellant filed under section 446(3) cr.p.c. cannot be sustained and the appellant surety is entitled to get refund of the amount of rs. 25,000/- deposited by him with the trial court.6. in the result, this appeal is allowed. the impugned order dated 3.6.2002 is quashed and the trial court is directed to refund the amount of rs. 25,000/- to the appellant surety deposited by him.

Full Judgment

Khem Chand Sharma, J.

1. At the joint request, I have heard learned Counsel for the parties for final disposal of this appeal at the admission stage.

2. In this case, the bail granted to accused Ram Lakchan on 8.2.2000 was cancelled by the learned Sessions Judge Dholpur vide order dated 29.9.2000 on an application moved under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. The revision petition preferred against the order cancelling the bail was moved, but the same was dismissed by this Court on 7.5.2002.

3. It may also be noted that vide order dated 13.6.2001, the trial court initiated proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. against the appellant surety of accused Ram Lakchan and vide order dated 17.7.2001, the learned trial court forfeited the amount of surety bond.

4. This appeal under Section 449 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant, who stood surety of accused Ram Lakchan seeking to challenge the order dated 3.6.2002 passed by the learned trial court whereby the application of the appellant filed under Section 446(3) Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

5. It appears that the bail bonds were cancelled on 29.9.2002 and after cancellation of the bail bonds neither there was any occasion nor it was legally permissible to initiate proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. against the appellant surety. In this view of the matter, the impugned order rejecting the application of the appellant filed under Section 446(3) Cr.P.C. cannot be sustained and the appellant surety is entitled to get refund of the amount of Rs. 25,000/- deposited by him with the trial court.

6. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 3.6.2002 is quashed and the trial court is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the appellant surety deposited by him.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2002 Same Parties Mohan Singh vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Khem Chand Sharma, J.

Criminal