Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sureshbhai Kachrabhai Solanki, filed a Special Criminal Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court, seeking a declaration that the learned Magistrate had acted illegally in imprisoning him for default of furnishing a surety bond, despite the petitioner having deposited Rs. 2500. The petitioner contended that the Magistrate failed to follow the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and violated his constitutional right to personal liberty under Article 21. The petitioner also sought a declaration that the amount of Rs. 2500 deposited by him was not a forfeiture of the surety bond and should be refunded, and that he was entitled to compensation from the State for the illegal detention. The High Court, presided over by Justice M. R. Mengdey, examined the provisions of the CrPC, particularly Sections 441, 442, 444, 446, and 449, which govern the procedure for bail bonds and forfeiture. The Court found that the Magistrate had not followed the due process for forfeiture of the bond and had illegally imprisoned the petitioner. The Court held that the imprisonment was not in exercise of judicial power under the CrPC and amounted to deprivation of personal liberty without authority of law. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition, declared the imprisonment illegal, directed the refund of Rs. 2500 to the petitioner, and held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation from the State for the violation of his constitutional rights.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Illegal Imprisonment - Default of Surety Bond - Sections 441, 442, 444, 446, 449, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The petitioner was imprisoned for default of furnishing surety bond despite having deposited Rs. 2500; the Magistrate failed to follow the procedure under CrPC for forfeiture of bond and imprisonment - Held that the imprisonment was illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution (Paras 1-3).
B) Criminal Procedure - Refund of Deposit - Forfeiture of Bond - Section 446, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The amount of Rs. 2500 deposited by the petitioner was not forfeited as per law and was not the amount of the surety bond; the petitioner was compelled to deposit the amount even after imprisonment - Held that the amount must be refunded to the petitioner (Para 4).
C) Constitutional Law - Compensation for Illegal Detention - Article 21, Constitution of India - The petitioner was deprived of personal liberty without following due process of law; the illegal imprisonment amounted to violation of fundamental rights - Held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation from the State for the illegal detention (Para 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Magistrate acted illegally in imprisoning the petitioner for default of surety bond without following the procedure under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of Rs. 2500 and compensation for violation of constitutional rights.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, declared the imprisonment illegal, directed the refund of Rs. 2500 to the petitioner, and held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation from the State for the illegal detention.
Law Points
- Illegal imprisonment
- violation of personal liberty
- Article 21
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
- Sections 441
- 442
- 444
- 446
- 449
- default of surety bond
- refund of deposit
- compensation for illegal detention
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 358
R/Special Criminal Application (Direction) No. 8255 of 2021 with Criminal Misc. Application (For Joining Party) No. 1 of 2024
MS SM AHUJA for the Applicant(s) No. 1, MR H K PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
Sureshbhai Kachrabhai Solanki
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Special Criminal Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus or certiorari against illegal imprisonment and violation of constitutional rights.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought a declaration that the Magistrate acted illegally in imprisoning him for default of surety bond, refund of Rs. 2500 deposited, and compensation for violation of personal liberty.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was imprisoned for default of furnishing a surety bond despite having deposited Rs. 2500, and the Magistrate did not follow the procedure under CrPC.
Issues
Whether the Magistrate acted illegally in imprisoning the petitioner for default of surety bond without following the procedure under CrPC?
Whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of Rs. 2500 deposited?
Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for illegal detention?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the Magistrate failed to follow the provisions of CrPC and violated constitutional mandate of protection given to a citizen.
The petitioner argued that the imprisonment was done with extra legal motive and amounts to deprivation of personal life and liberty.
The petitioner argued that the amount of Rs. 2500 was not forfeited as per law and should be refunded.
The petitioner argued that he is entitled to compensation from the State for violation of constitutional and legal rights.
Ratio Decidendi
The Magistrate's failure to follow the procedure under Sections 441, 442, 444, 446, and 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for forfeiture of bond and imprisonment for default renders the imprisonment illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. The amount deposited by the petitioner not being forfeited as per law must be refunded, and the petitioner is entitled to compensation for the illegal deprivation of personal liberty.
Judgment Excerpts
By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief...
Be pleased to hold and declare that, the Ld. Magistrate has not followed the provisions prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure and has also violated the Constitutional Mandate of protection given to a citizen...
Be pleased to hold and declare that the Ld. Magistrate has acted illegally to imprison the petitioner with extra legal motive and such an action of the Ld. Magistrate amounts to deprivation of personal life and liberty...
Be pleased to further hold and declare that, the illegal imprisonment of the petitioner has been done not in exercise of Judicial power as conferred by and under the Code of Criminal Procedure...
Further be pleased to hold and declare that the amount of Rs.2500/- compelled to be deposited even after imprisonment is not the amount on forfeiture of the bond of the surety and therefore the same amount is required to be refunded back to the petitioner...
Further be pleased to hold and declare that the petitioner is deprived of his personal liberty and his constitutional and legal rights have been violated and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation from the state...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Special Criminal Application No. 8255 of 2021 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. A Criminal Misc. Application for Joining Party No. 1 of 2024 was also filed in the same petition. The matter was heard by Justice M. R. Mengdey, who delivered judgment on 27/02/2026.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 21, Article 226
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 441, 442, 444, 446, 449
