Procedure when bond has been forfeited
Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with procedure when bond has been forfeited. Where a bond under this Code 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 where, in respect of any other bond under this C The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
(1) Where a bond under this Code 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 where, in respect of any other bond under this Code, 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 Code.
["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, at its discretion, 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 106 or section 117 or section 360 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 448, a certified copy of the judgment of the Court by which he was convicted
Section 446, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 491 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 6
- s. 274 Record in summons-cases and inquiries
- s. 436 In what cases bail to be taken
- s. 446A 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
- s. 447 Procedure in case of insolvency or death of surety or when a bond isforfeited
- s. 449 Appeal from orders under section 446
- s. 461 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
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: s.446(3) vests discretion to remit any portion of a forfeited-bond penalty after recording reasons; an excessive Rs 5 lakh forfeiture was reduced to Rs 5,000 (Istkar).
-
Mem Singh and Another vs State of U.p.
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.
-
Pratap Singh Gaekwad vs State of Nct of Delhi
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
-
Pratap Singh Gaekwad vs State of Nct of Delhi
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
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.
-
Shimpu Alias Som Dutt vs State of Hp
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
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
-
Atul Sen vs State of H.p.
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
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.
-
… No.1/2021 in S.C. No.550/2020 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Kunnamkulam. They assail the order dated 23.12.2022 imposing penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- each under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. The appellants were the sureties of the accused in S.C. No.550/2020. The trial court, holding that the accused failed to appear before the court in terms of the bail bond and thereby …
-
… U D G M E N T Dated this the 14th day of September, 2023 The appellants are counter petitioners in Miscellaneous Case No.25 of 2022 in S.C.No.83 of 2020 on the files of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kasaragod in Crime No.237 of 2017 of Kumbla Police Station. 2. The said case was registered under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, due to the non appearance of the accused. 3. The appellants stood as sureties for release of the accused on bail and executed a bond for an amount of ₹50,000/-. The appellants would submit that though the accused appeared before the Court several times, subsequently, the …
-
… U D G M E N T Dated this the 14th day of September, 2023 The appellants are counter petitioners in Miscellaneous Case No.2 of 2021 in S.C.No.189 of 2017 on the files of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kasaragod in Crime No.31 of 2017 of Kumbla Police Station. 2. The said case was registered under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, due to the non appearance of the accused. 3. The appellants stood as sureties for release of the accused on bail and executed a bond for an amount of ₹40,000/-. The appellants would submit that though the accused appeared before the Court several times, subsequently, the …
Questions about Section 446
What have the courts held on Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Istkar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (11 Nov 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.446(3) vests discretion to remit any portion of a forfeited-bond penalty after recording reasons; an excessive Rs 5 lakh forfeiture was reduced to Rs 5,000 (Istkar). 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 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
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: CRPC 446, section 446 CRPC, section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 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 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 106 (Security for keeping the peace on conviction), section 117 (Order to give security), section 360 (Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition), section 448 (Bond required from minor), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 6 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 491 (Procedure when bond has been forfeited), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 446, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.