Skip to main content

BAIL VERSUS BONDS


Bail and Bonds

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,2023 (BNSS) 

Bail and Bonds are legal terms that relate to the release of an accused person from custody. Bail is the security given by the accused or someone on his behalf to the court or the police, to ensure his appearance before the court during the trial. Bonds are the written undertakings signed by the accused and his sureties, to pay a fixed amount of money if the accused fails to appear in court.


The Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,2023 (BNSS) is the main law that governs the procedure of criminal cases in India. It contains various provisions regarding bail and bonds, which are mentioned under Chapter XXXV (Sections 478 to 496) of the BNSS. The BNSS also classifies offences into two categories: bailable and non-bailable. Bailable offences are those for which bail can be claimed as a matter of right, while non-bailable offences are those for which bail is granted at the discretion of the court.


Some of the main points of comparison between Bail and Bonds with special reference to the BNSS are:


- Bail can be granted by the police or the court, while Bonds can only be executed before the court.

- Bail can be granted either with or without sureties, while Bonds always require sureties.

- Bail can be granted either before or after arrest, while Bonds can only be executed after arrest.

- Bail can be cancelled by the court for various reasons, such as misuse of liberty, tampering with evidence, or non-appearance of the accused, while Bonds can only be forfeited if the accused fails to appear in court.

- Bail can be granted for any amount of money, while Bonds have a fixed amount of money specified by the court.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Theories of Punishment

Theories of Punishment Punishment in law serves multiple purposes, and the rationale behind these punishments can be understood through different theories of punishment. These theories form the foundation for justifying punishment and help in shaping law s and sentencing policies. Here’s a detailed explanation of each theory with examples: 1. Deterrent Theory The deterrent theory focuses on preventing crime by imposing severe punishments to create fear among people. The idea is that potential offenders will refrain from committing crimes if they fear punishment. Example : The death penalty or long-term imprisonment for serious offenses like murder or terrorism acts as a deterrent for those considering committing such crimes. 2. Retributive Theory This theory is based on the principle of "an eye for an eye" or giving the offender what they deserve. It focuses on vengeance or moral satisfaction, ensuring the punishment is proportionate to the crime committed. The goal is not to...
Post a Comment
Read more

PART-2 IMPORTANT MCQ'S OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

PART-2  IMPORTANT MCQ'S OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 1. Hira Nath Mishra Vs. Principal, Rajendra Medical College, is a leading case on:   (A) Judicial review  (B) Right of Cross-examination   (C) Reasoned decision   (D) Public corporation  Answer : (B) Right of Cross-examination Explanation : This case involved the expulsion of some students from a medical college for misconduct without giving them a chance to cross-examine the witnesses against them. The Supreme Court held that this violated the principles of natural justice and quashed the expulsion order. The court observed that the right of cross-examination is an essential element of a fair hearing and cannot be denied arbitrarily.  2 . Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India is related to:   (A) Writ of certiorari   (B) Post-decisional hearing  (C) Tortious liability of State  (D) Lokpal Answer : (B) Post-decisional hearing Explanation : This case involved the ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another, 43 I.A. 151 (P.C. 1915). Section 53 - Fradulent transfer

Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another, 43 I.A. 151 (P.C. 1915).  This citation indicates that the case was decided by the Privy Council (P.C.) in 1915, and reported in volume 43 of the Indian Appeals (I.A.), starting from page 151.  The case of Musahar Sahu and Another v. Lala Hakim Lal and Another was a dispute over the validity of two conveyances of land executed by a debtor, Kishun Benode, to his relatives, Kamta Prashad and Hakim Lal, on 2nd September 1901. The plaintiff, Musahar Sahu, was a creditor of Kishun Benode who had obtained a judgment against him on 5th December 1901. The plaintiff sought to set aside the conveyances on the ground that they were made with intent to defeat or delay his claim, under section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The courts gave different verdicts on the two conveyances. The first conveyance, in favour of Kamta Prashad, was set aside by the Subordinate Judge and the High Court, as it was found to be without consi...
Post a Comment
Read more