| Case ID |
d4e926e7-78c5-437f-8d6e-bf2d43ada174 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Revision Petition No. 243 of 1952 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 26, 1952 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court set aside the order of forfeiture of the surety bond dated 25th September 1951, along with all consequential proceedings, including the penalty of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the sureties. The court held that the order of forfeiture was ultra vires as it was made by a single member of the District Tribunal, contrary to the provisions of the Punjab Control of Goondas Act. The court emphasized that judicial orders, such as the forfeiture of a surety bond, must adhere strictly to the procedures outlined in the law. The decision underlined the importance of allowing sureties to explain their default before any forfeiture is enforced, as various circumstances may absolve them of responsibility. The court directed that proper proceedings be initiated to reassess the bond's forfeiture and penalties, aligning with legal requirements. |
| Summary |
In this landmark case, the Lahore High Court addressed the procedural validity of a forfeiture order against sureties under the Punjab Control of Goondas Act. The case arose from a judicial order that forfeited a surety bond due to the absence of the individual it covered. The court ruled that such an order must be made by both members of the Tribunal, asserting the judicial nature of such decisions. The judgment highlighted the necessity of strict adherence to legal procedures to uphold the rights of sureties and prevent undue penalties. This case sets a precedent for the treatment of sureties in similar legal contexts, emphasizing the balance between enforcing obligations and recognizing the rights of individuals involved in judicial proceedings. Legal practitioners must note the implications of this ruling for future cases involving surety bonds, as it reinforces the importance of procedural correctness in judicial decisions. The case serves as a critical reference point in understanding the judicial framework surrounding surety obligations, ensuring that the legal rights of individuals are protected against arbitrary enforcement actions. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
CORNELIUS, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mahmud Ali,
S. A. Mahmud
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD DIN,
MUSTAQIM
|
| Respondents |
THE CROWN
|
| Citations |
1952 SLD 17,
1952 PLD 660
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Control of Goondas Act, (XIV of 1951),
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
|
| Sections |
3,
16(5),
13,
21,
514(1)
|