Ramphal and Anr vs State of Haryana and Ors

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) is for quashing of order dated 12.01.2018 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Mahendergarh at Narnaul, whereby recovery of Rs.2,00,000/- each was ordered against the petitioners, as well as judgment dated 16.07.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, affirming the said order.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had furnished surety bonds of Rs.2,00,000/- each for the release of convict Joginder @ Jogad on parole. Though the convict was required to surrender on 19.07.2017, he surrendered before the District Jail, Narnaul on 20.07.2017, i.e. with a delay of only one day. It is further submitted that petitioner No.1 is aged about 75 years and the petitioners had stood surety in good faith, without any intention to facilitate the non-surrender of the convict. It is contended that recovery of the entire surety amount of Rs.2,00,000/- each is harsh and disproportionate, particularly when the convict surrendered on the very next day. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that a lenient view may be taken and the amount of recovery may suitably be reduced. The relevant record also shows that the parole was granted for four weeks and the stipulated surrender date was 19.07.2017, whereas the convict ultimately surrendered on 20.07.2017.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana, who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 and submits that the petitioners had furnished surety bonds for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- each and the convict failed to surrender on the stipulated date, thereby violating the conditions of the parole and the surety bonds. It is, however, not disputed that the convict surrendered before the District Jail, Narnaul on 20.07.2017, i.e. on the very next day. The State, accordingly, leaves the matter to the discretion of this Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

The fact remains that the convict surrendered before the District Jail, Narnaul on 20.07.2017, i.e. only one day after the stipulated date. The order dated 12.01.2018 directed recovery of the entire amount of Rs.2,00,000/- each from the petitioners, which was subsequently affirmed by the learned revisional Court vide judgment dated 16.07.2026.

Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the fact that the delay in surrender was only of one day, this Court is of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the amount of recovery is reduced from Rs.2,00,000/- each to Rs.25,000/- each.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12.01.2018, as affirmed vide order dated 16.07.2026, is modified to the extent that the petitioners shall be liable to pay Rs.25,000/- each instead of Rs.2,00,000/- each.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.