Procedure when bond has been forfeited
Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with procedure when bond has been forfeited. Where,--- (a) a bond under this Sanhita is for appearance, or for production of property, before a Court and it is proved to the satisfaction of that Court, or of any Court to which the case has subsequently been transferred, that the bond has been forfeited; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Where,---
(a) a bond under this Sanhita is for appearance, or for production of property, before a Court and it is proved to the satisfaction of that Court, or of any Court to which the case has subsequently been transferred, that the bond has been forfeited; or
(b) in respect of any other bond under this Sanhita, it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court by which the bond was taken, or of any Court to which the case has subsequently been transferred, or of the Court of any Magistrate of the first class, that the bond has been forfeited,
the Court shall record the grounds of such proof, and may call upon any person bound by such bond to pay the penalty thereof or to show cause why it should not be paid.
Explanation.—A condition in a bond for appearance, or for production of property, before a Court shall be construed as including a condition for appearance, or as the case may be, for production of property, before any Court to which the case may subsequently be transferred.
(2) If sufficient cause is not shown and the penalty is not paid, the Court may proceed to recover the same as if such penalty were a fine imposed by it under this Sanhita:
Provided that where such penalty is not paid and cannot be recovered in the manner aforesaid, the person so bound as surety shall be liable, by order of the Court ordering the recovery of the penalty, to imprisonment in civil jail for a term which may extend to six months.
(3) The Court may, after recording its reasons for doing so, remit any portion of the penalty mentioned and enforce payment in part only.
(4) Where a surety to a bond dies before the bond is forfeited, his estate shall be discharged from all liability in respect of the bond.
(5) Where any person who has furnished security under section 125 or section 136 or section 401 is convicted of an offence the commission of which constitutes a breach of the conditions of his bond, or of a bond executed in lieu of his bond under section 494, a certified copy of the judgment of the Court by which he was convicted of such offence may be used as evidence in proceedings under this section against his surety or sureties, and, if such certified copy is so used, the Court shall presume that such offence was committed by him unless the contrary is proved.
Section 491, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 446 Procedure when bond has been forfeited Text carried over almost unchanged 97%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Referred to by 7
- s. 309 Record in summons-cases and inquiries
- s. 478 In what cases bail to be taken
- s. 481 Bail to require accused to appear before next Appellate Court
- s. 492 Cancellation of bond and bail bond
- s. 493 Procedure in case of insolvency or death of surety or when a bond is forfeited
- s. 495 Appeal from orders under section 491
- s. 507 Irregularities which vitiate proceedings
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Istkar v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-3.pdf 2022-11-11 DATE VERIFIED. Crl A 2034/2022. Maheshwari/Dhulia. CrPC 446(3) vests discretion to remit any portion of a forfeited-bond penalty after recording reasons; a Rs 5 lakh forfeiture against a daily-wage earner was reduced to Rs 5,000. Map 446 only; do not pad 107/117/122 (background Chapter VIII) or IPC 186.
On this section: Successor of CrPC 446 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 0.9659). The discretion to remit a forfeited-bond penalty carries to BNSS 491.
-
Pratap Singh Gaekwad vs State of Nct of Delhi
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Rejection of an application seeking exemption from personal appearance due to some contingency cannot, by any stretch of imagination, come within the ambit of either absconding or not obeying the summons or non-appearance despite proof of due service of summons or 'non-appearance' as contemplated by Section 89 CrPC, nor such 'non-appearance' is a breach of condition of the bond either of a person who is on bail or of a surety that such a person shall attend at the time and place mentioned in the bond. Therefore, no court shall forfeit personal bond or surety bond or issue warrant of arrest merely because an exemption application is rejected.
On this section: Forfeiture of bond requires proof to satisfaction of court that bond has been forfeited; court must record grounds of such proof and call upon person to show cause; rejection of exemption application does not constitute forfeiture
-
Pratap Singh Gaekwad vs State of Nct of Delhi
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Rejection of an application for exemption from personal appearance due to some contingency cannot, by any stretch of imagination, come within the ambit of either absconding or not obeying summons or non-appearance despite proof of due service of summons or 'non-appearance' as contemplated by Section 89 CrPC, nor can such 'non-appearance' be a breach of condition of the bond either of a person on bail or of a surety. Therefore, no court shall forfeit personal bond or surety bond or issue non-bailable warrants merely because an exemption application is rejected. The only permissible course is to direct the accused to appear or issue summons.
On this section: Procedure for forfeiture of bonds. Court must be satisfied that bond has been forfeited and must record grounds of such proof. Court can then call upon person bound by bond to pay penalty or show cause. Mandatory recording of reasons is essential.
-
Mem Singh and Another vs State of U.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where sureties have substantially complied with court orders by depositing a portion of the forfeited surety amount and subsequently expire during the pendency of an appeal challenging the forfeiture order, the court may exercise its discretionary power under Section 446(3) CrPC to remit the remaining portion of the penalty in the interest of justice, balancing the principles of procedural compliance with equitable considerations.
On this section: Section 446 deals with forfeiture of security and provides the framework for recovery of forfeited surety amounts. The court applied Section 446(3) which grants discretion to remit the forfeited amount in the interest of justice.
-
Shimpu Alias Som Dutt vs State of Hp
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving serious criminal charges under the SC/ST Atrocities Act and POCSO Act, bail may be granted by the High Court under Section 439 CrPC if the accused demonstrates cooperation with investigation and willingness to submit to court authority, provided that stringent and comprehensive conditions are imposed to protect victims, prevent witness intimidation, ensure investigation cooperation, and maintain trial integrity. The court must apply the Arnesh Kumar principles while tailoring conditions to the specific circumstances of each case.
On this section: Relates to forfeiture of bail bonds; referenced in context of recovery of State expenditure
-
Shiv Dei vs State of Hp
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused released on bail files an exemption application citing compelling circumstances (such as natural calamity) and the bail conditions expressly reserve liberty to seek such exemption, the trial court cannot reject the application without proper reasoning, verification of facts, or consideration of the explanation provided. Failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and renders the subsequent bail cancellation and surety penalty orders unsustainable. A surety cannot be held liable for penalty when the accused has complied with the procedural requirement of seeking exemption through appropriate application.
On this section: Non-bailable warrant against surety for failure to produce accused; Court held that notice under Section 446 cannot be issued if the accused had filed a valid exemption application
-
Pratap Singh Gaekwad vs State of Nct of Delhi
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Rejection of an application for exemption from personal appearance in criminal proceedings, by no stretch of imagination, can come within the ambit of either absconding, not obeying summons, or non-appearance despite proof of due service of summons as contemplated by Sections 87 and 89 CrPC. Therefore, rejection of such an application cannot be grounds for issuing warrants of arrest, forfeiting personal bonds, forfeiting surety bonds, or issuing notice to sureties. The only proper course when exemption is rejected is to direct the accused to appear on the next date or to issue summons for appearance under Section 205 CrPC. Before forfeiting any bond under Section 446 CrPC, the court must satisfy itself about proof of breach of bond conditions and must record reasons of such proof in writing.
On this section: Procedure for bond forfeiture; court must satisfy itself that bond has been forfeited and must record grounds of such proof; must call upon person bound by bond to show cause why penalty should not be paid
-
Atul Sen vs State of H.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A petition seeking quashing of judicial orders is not maintainable when the prayer clause seeks relief against orders directing FIR registration under Section 229 IPC, but the actual operative orders (as corrected by the trial court) direct FIR registration under Section 229A IPC. The petitioner must file a fresh petition specifically challenging the corrected operative order to maintain the petition. The principle of 'relief cannot exceed prayer clause' applies strictly to maintain procedural integrity.
On this section: Forfeiture of bonds; trial court initiated proceedings under this section for forfeiture of bail bond amount
-
Raj Kumar& ANR. vs State
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 446, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a party seeks relief from a trial court order, the appropriate remedy is to file an appeal under Section 449 CrPC rather than a miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC. The High Court may permit withdrawal of a miscellaneous petition with liberty to pursue the appropriate remedy.
On this section: Trial court's power to pass orders; the impugned order was passed under this section
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.S.SUDHA, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.Appeal No.193 of 2025 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February 2025 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal under Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed by the counter petitioners in M.C.No.5/2024 in S.C.No.206/2023 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court, Erattupetta. The counter petitioners were the sureties of the accused in the said case. The accused failed to appear before the court and hence the bail …
-
… Appeal No.2313 of 2024 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December 2024 J U D G M E N T This appeal under Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita is against the order dated 13/06/2023 in MC No.7/2023 in SC No.2/2017 on the file of the court of the Sessions Judge, Manjeri, whereby the appellant, the 1st counter petitioner therein, one of the sureties of the 6th accused has been directed to pay penalty of ₹25,000/- and …
-
… Appeal No.2266 of 2024 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9 th day of December 2024 J U D G M E N T This appeal under Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita is against the order dated 05/06/2023 in MC No.3/2023 in SC No.472/2016 on the file of the Court of Session, Manjeri, whereby the appellant, the 1st counter petitioner in the MC and a surety of the 2nd accused has been directed to pay penalty of ₹25,000/- as he was unable to …
Questions about Section 491
What have the courts held on Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Istkar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (11 Nov 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 446, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Successor of CrPC 446 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 0.9659). The discretion to remit a forfeited-bond penalty carries to BNSS 491. Another 8 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2003 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 491, section 491 BNSS, section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type 491 bnss in crpc and 491 bnss act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 9 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Istkar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (11 Nov 2022).
What should I read with Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 125 (Security for keeping peace on conviction), section 136 (Order to give security), section 401 (Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition), section 494 (Bond required from child), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 7 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward CrPC 446 (Procedure when bond has been forfeited), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 491 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 491, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.