CrPC surety bonds require a natural person; corporations and banks cannot act as surety under the bail scheme.

The CrPC provisions governing bail bonds were construed as requiring a surety who can practically secure the accused's attendance and bear liability for default. The general definition of "person" could not control where the statutory scheme indicated a different intention, and the option to deposit money in lieu of bond was treated as applicable to the person executing the bond, not the surety. On that reading, forfeiture and imprisonment for default were inconsistent with an artificial person acting as surety, so corporations and similar entities were excluded from executing surety bonds.

---

---

Issues: Whether a surety bond under the Criminal Procedure Code can be executed by an artificial person such as a corporation or bank, or whether the surety must be a natural person.

Analysis: The governing provisions were read together and in context. The general definition of "person" in the Indian Penal Code, though referred to in the Criminal Procedure Code, could not control every use of the term where the subject-matter required a different intention. The scheme of the bail and bond provisions showed that the surety is intended to secure the attendance of the accused and to be answerable in a practical sense for default. The provision enabling deposit of money in lieu of bond was held to apply to the person required to execute the bond, not to the surety. The liability framework, including forfeiture and imprisonment for default, was treated as inconsistent with an artificial person acting as surety. The Court therefore construed the relevant provisions as excluding corporations and similar entities from executing surety bonds.

Conclusion: A surety bond under the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be executed by an artificial person; only a natural person can act as surety.

---