BHUSHAN LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole question that arised for consideration in this criminal revision petition is whether a court while directing the release of an accused on bail on his executing a bond for a certain sum of money and on his furnishing the security of one or two sureties could insist that the sureties should produce certificate to the effect that they were possessed of movable properties of the value of the amounts stated in the bonds to be executed by them.

(2.) THE petitioner herein is an accused in a case under S. 420 of the RPC pending in the court of the CJM Jammu. The petitioner was directed to be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 40,000/ - with one surety in a like sum. This order of the learned Magistrate was modified by the Sessions Judge Jammu by reducing the amount of the bonds to be executed by the petitioner and his surety to Rs. 10,000/ - each. The petitioner executed the bond as directed and produced one surety along with a certificate of the Tehsildar, Kapurthala, as well as the report of the Municipal Commissioner, Kapurthala, to the effect that the said surety was possessed of house property at Kapurthala of the value of about Rs. 30,000/ -. The learned Magistrate declined to accept this surety on the ground that under S. 514 of the Criminal P.C. the court on forfeiture of the bond could not proceed to attach immovable property of the surety but could only attach and put to sale the movable property of the surety. The learned Magistrate did not specifically ask the petitioner to produce a surety who was possessed of sufficient movable property, but it would be a legitimate inference to draw from the order of the learned Magistrate and from the reasons given therein that he required the petitioner to produce a surety who was possessed of sufficient movable property.

(3.) THE relevant provisions in the Criminal P.C. relating to the bonds to be executed by an accused and the sureties are Ss. 489, 499, 513, 514, 514 -A, 514 -B, 515 and 516.