Kishan Dutt
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERSONAL BOND AND SURETY BOND IN CRIMINAL CASES
Kishan Dutt Kalaskar 19 Mar 2025

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERSONAL BOND AND SURETY BOND IN CRIMINAL CASES

INTRODUCTION: - Under the purview of criminal law personal bonds and surety bonds are very essential which works as a safeguard, providing a relief in respect of an accused person, through which he can be released from custody whilethe trial is in waiting. These bonds conduct as guarantees, ensuring the accused will comply with the mentioned conditions finalized by the court. While both personal and surety bonds act as security but they have significant amount of distinction. Through this blog will be exploring these two element, probing into its explanation.

 

BACKGROUND: - The origins of bail and bond systems can be traced back to ancient civilizations. During medieval England, the essence and the growth of the bail was ensured that accused persons could be released from custody while the trial is in wait. Over time, these system got evolved, including the various forms of bonds, such as personal and surety bonds, securing the release of accused persons.

In India, the bail system was introduced by the British authority, through which it got emergedinto the Indian legal framework, for instance the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, granting the bail in criminal cases.

 

KEY DIFFERENCE: - The existing difference are the following below-

·         A personal bond, is a written promise signed by the accused, agreeing to comply with the conditions set by the court and to appear for trial, while a surety bond involves a third party, known as a surety, who guarantees the accused's compliance with the court's conditions and appearance at trial.

·        There is no financial cost or collateral involved for the accused when signing a personal bond, in the case of surety bond, it requires the surety to pledge a certain amount of money or property as collateral.

·        There is no need for a surety in a personal bond, only the accused is solely responsible for compliance under conditions mentioned by the court, while in the surety bond the role of surety is very crucial role, as they pledge collateral and ensure the accused's compliance. The surety assumes the risk of forfeiture if the accused fails to comply.

·        The opportunity of release are solely based on the accused's promise of compliance. These conditions may include appearing at trial, not leaving the jurisdiction, and not engaging in criminal activity, while the release conditions are enforced by the surety, who is responsible for ensuring the accused's compliance, which also includes additional conditions given by the surety himself to avoid the risk.

 

STATUTORY PROVISIONS: - The existing certain law which contains this two type of bond particularly comes under the criminal law which already also mentioned above, But we be delving in the precis manner, which are-

1. Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973

Section 436: Deals with bail in bailable offences and allows the accused to be released on personal bond without sureties.

Section 441: Allows the release of an accused on their own bond or on bail, requiring the accused to attend at the time and place specified in the bond.

Section 446: It less down the procedure when a bond has been forfeited. The surety may be liable to imprisonment if the penalty cannot be recovered.

2. The court may also accept affidavits to determine the eligibility of the surety etc.

CASE LAW: - Some landmark cases dealt by the Supreme Court itself related to these above bonds include-

·        Ram Lal v. State of U.P (1979): Under this case the surety’s undertaking to secure the accused’s presence is distinct of the accused’s undertaking to appear in court.

·        Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1978): This case established the principle that bail conditions should not be oppressive and should consider the financial capacity of the accused.

·        State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1977): Court has established the principle that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception,” essentially emphasizes that the courts should be cautious when denying bail of an accused person unless there is a significant amount of risk of them interfering in the legal process.

·        In multiple cases related to bail the courts has mentioned the importance of balancing the accused’s fundamental rights related to right to life and liberty including the necessity of their presence.

CONCLUSION: - In the end of this discussion, the personal bonds and surety bonds serve as essential mechanisms for ensuring the release of accused persons. Personal bonds rely on the accused's own diligence and without involving in any financial or any implications, making them accessible for individuals with certain limitations, while surety bonds, involves a third party who pledges, providing series of assurance in front of the court of , for any relevant inconvenience regarding above mentioned matters you can contact Online Legal Query, who can navigate you towards those senior legal experts who are eligible also qualified to help so far through proper presentation of knowledge.

Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

1946

DAYS

21

HOURS

30

MINUTES

14

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com