The High Court allowed the appeal modifying the bail penalty imposed on sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C. from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 5,000 per head, deeming the original amount exorbitant. The Court directed adjustment of already deposited sums.
Reduced penalty to Rs. 5,000 per appellant and directed adjustment of deposited amounts; coercive steps cancelled.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/17TH MAGHA 1934
CRL.A.No. 118 of 2013
[AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN MC.70/2012 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-III, KASARAGOD DATED 17-03-2012]
APPELLANTS(S)/RESPONDENTS:
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.V.H.JASMINE.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-
02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
Crl.A.No. 118 of 2013
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2013
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in this appeal filed under Section 449 of the
Cr.P.C. is against an order dated 17.3.2012 in MC No.70 of 2012 in SC NO.116 of 2012 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADHOC)-III, Kasaragod by which the learned Judge imposed a penalty of `25,000/- on each of the appellants under Section 446 of the Cr.P.C.
CRL.A.NO.118 of 2013
:-2-:
counsel for the appellants. The subsequent surrender of the accused
for whom the appellants stood as sureties is not a ground to interfere with the findings of the court below under Section 446 of the Cr.P.C. However, it appears that the learned Judge of the trial court imposed a penalty of 25,000/-, which is an amount equal to the bond amount, which, according to me, is exorbitant considering the facts and circumstances involved in the case. Therefore, according to me, while confirming the liability fixed upon the appellants under Section 446 of the Cr.P.C., the penalty amount may be modified and the amount of 5000/- will be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, each of the appellants is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- instead of Rs.25,000/- under Section 446 of the Cr.P.C.
CRL.A.NO.118 of 2013
:-3-:
be ordered to be adjusted against the revised penalty amount. I find
no reason to reject the above request. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the trial court that an amount of `5000/- deposited by each of the appellants as per the above order of this Court and as evident from the receipt dated 10.1.2013 produced before this Court by memo dated 17.7.2013 is ordered to be adjusted against the amount now modified and fixed by this Court. As the appellants have already deposited the modified penalty amount, coercive steps, if any, pending against them shall stand cancelled.
This Criminal Appeal is disposed of as above.
sd/-
V.K.MOHANAN, Judge
MBS/
P.S.TO JUDGE
CRL.A.NO.118 of 2013
:-4-:
V.K.MOHANAN, J .
CRL.A.No. 796 OF 2003
CRL.A.NO.118 of 2013
:-5-:
JUDGMENT
Dated:4.10.2011
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the penalty imposed under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. for failure to furnish bail is reasonable.
Whether the subsequent surrender of the principal accused constitutes a valid ground to modify bail penalty awarded under Section 446 of Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
ZUHARA W/O.HASSAINAR
K.M.ABDUL MUTHALIB S/O.MOOSA
STATE OF KERALA
V.K.MOHANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
