Bond

Held; S. 513, Cr.P.C., did not authorize a Court to demand cash security, however, the same could be permitted only if required by the accused

Words "permit him to deposit" used in S. 513, Cr.P.C., were not without significance and suggested of a situation where something was permitted upon the request of the accused but never ordered by the Court of its own

Object of S. 513, Cr.P.C., was to enable an accused to deposit cash security in case if he was unable to find out sureties

Accused did not belong to District 'H', she was a permanent resident of District 'R' and did not seem to have sufficient link at District 'H'

Request of accused, being genuine, was accepted, in circumstances.

Bond was an instrument whereby a person would be bound to pay money to another person conditionally, however such obligation binding the person would become void on performance or non-performance of a specified act

Bond could be without any condition whereby a person would be bound to pay money to the other through a document attested by a witness but not payable to "order" or "bearer" and such bond could be an instrument committing a person to deliver agricultural produce to another

Test to find out whether a document was a bond or not, the whole document itself coupled with intent of the parties therein was to be examined

lf document spoke about a liability or a right in existence between the parties prior to the execution of such instrument then same would not be a bond

Document which had created obligation for the first time would be deemed to be a bond and prerequisite would be that same should not be payable to the "order" or "bearer".

Bond includes an instrument attested by a witness, whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another, but not payable to order or bearer.