Criminal Appeal challenging the issuance of recovery warrants against sureties. The High Court quashed orders directing execution without a prior order for bail bond forfeiture under Cr.P.C. Section 446, holding the subsequent warrant illegal.
Orders dated 02.04.2024 and 15.04.2024 set aside; recovery certificate directed to be returned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:139974
Court No. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7543 of 2024 Appellant :- Babu Singh @ Dablu And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Vinod Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This criminal appeal has been preferred against the impugned orders dated 02.04.2024 and 15.04.2024 passed by Additional Session Judge III / Special Judge Dacoity Affected Area Kanpur Dehat in Session Trial No. 316 of 2000 (Case Crime No. 16 of 1995) ( State Versus Lal Jee and others), under Sections 147,148, 149, 307 I.P.C. Police Station Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar, by which bail bond of the accused Sanjay Singh son of Harendra Vikram Singh has been forfeited and recovery warrant has been issued against the appellants for the sureties.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that in this case, the appellants stood as sureties for the accused Sanjay. The accused Sanjay did not appear before the learned trial court that was the reason, notices were issued to the sureties vide order dated 20.11.2023, thereafter, case was fixed for 12.12.2023, 05.01.2024, 02.02.2024, 04.03.2024. No any order for forfeiture of bail bond was passed by the learned trial court on any date as aforesaid. On 02.04.2024, recovery warrant was ordered to be issued against the sureties/appellants in pursuance to which recovery certificate was sent to the District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat for execution on printed proforma mentioning the fact that bail bond executed by the sureties/appellants has been forfeited in favour of the State, though there is no any such order is in existence, therefore, orders for issuing recovery warrant were being illegal, cannot sustain in the eye of law. It is further submitted that accused-Sanjay appeared before the trial court and got bail subsequently, therefore request to allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the learned trial court for issuing recovery warrant on 02.04.2024.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid, but could not dispute the fact that there is no any order of forfeiture of bail bond
of the sureties on record.
On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, order sheet annexed from 20.11.2023, 12.12.2023, 05.01.2024, 02.02.2024, 04.03.2024 as aforesaid and recovery certificate issued against the sureties/appellants and sent to District Magistrate, Kanpur Dehart for execution, it appears that only notice was issued by the learned trial court under Section 446 Cr. P.C. against the sureties/appellants and thereafter recovery warrant was issued on 02.04.2024 straightway without passing any order for forfeiture of bail bond. In this way, the order dated 02.04.2024 and subsequent thereto relating to notice and recovery certificate against sureties cannot be said to be lawful, but illegal and cannot sustain in the eye of law. It is also to note that before issuance of recovery certificate against the sureties, first bail bonds are to be forfeited under Section 446 Cr. P.C. by the learned trial court which was also not done in this case, therefore the order passed by it is illegal and liable to be set aside.
In view of the above, the orders dated 02.04.2024 and 15.04.2024 and subsequent thereto are hereby set-aside and this appeal is allowed and learned trial court is directed to get recovery certificate returned.
Order Date :- 30.8.2024 T.S.
Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the issuance of a recovery warrant against sureties without a prior order for forfeiture of the bail bond is lawful.
Whether an order issued without a prior judicial finding on forfeiture of bail can sustain in law.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Babu Singh @ Dablu and Another
State of U.P.
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Tribhuvan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
