GEETHA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the order passed under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code', for short). The appellants are the sureties who were directed to pay penalty under Section 446 of the Code.

(2.) The appellants along with one of the accused, executed a bond for appearance of the accused before court. But, accused absconded after executing the bond. Hence, proceedings were initiated against them under Section 446 of the Code. On appearance of the appellants, they were directed to show cause why bond should not be forfeited for the laches. They stated that they are unable to produce the accused, as he is absconding. The trial court found their explanation to be not satisfactory. Hence, it was found that the bond was forfeited. The appellants were, therefore, directed to pay penalty of Rs. 20,000/- each under Section 446 of the Code. The said order is under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) On a plain reading of the order itself, I find that the order is per se illegal. Hence, even the records in this case may not be necessary for a disposal of the appeal. It is curious to note that the trial court treated the proceedings under Section 446 of the Code as an 'offence'. This is revealed from what is specifically recorded in the very opening paragraph of the order. It is also revealed from the impugned order that the trial court did not record the grounds of proof of satisfaction that the bond has been forfeited. Recording of grounds of such proof is mandatory requirement without which the court cannot proceed any further under Section 446 of the Code. The impugned order is unsustainable on this ground itself.