SAREENA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is Section 437A of Cr.P.C. mandatory in nature This is the pertinent question that crops up for consideration in this case.

(2.) Section 437A of Cr.P.C. was introduced as per Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 2008 (Act 5 of 2009) which was brought into force with effect from 31-12-2009. The main object of this section is to secure attendance of the accused at the appellate stage, if any appeal is filed against the verdict of acquittal or for enhancement of the sentence.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that no specific provision as to the consequence for violation of direction to execute bond in terms of Section 437A has been made. If the accused, who was granted bail by the Court earlier, does not commit breach of any of the conditions stipulated in the bond, how can he be compelled to execute another bond before the conclusion of trial to make the bail bond alive for a further period of six months If the accused fails to execute the bond in terms of section 437A of Cr.P.C. how can the accused be remanded How can it be held that the accused has committed breach of the earlier conditions imposed by the Court while granting bail If the accused fails to execute the bond in terms of Section 437A how can the pronouncement of the judgment be postponed indefinitely These are some of the questions put by Sri S. U. Nazar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, which could not be properly answered by the respondents.