Strict construction of surety bonds bars forfeiture where no clear production date and time is specified.

A surety bond creating penal liability must be strictly construed, and liability can arise only from the bond's own clear terms. Where the bond does not specify a date and time for production of the accused, the Court cannot rely on surrounding circumstances or the accused's separate bail bond to enforce forfeiture against the surety. Each bond operates as a distinct contract and must stand or fall on its own wording. On that basis, forfeiture could not be sustained, the revision succeeded, the forfeiture order was set aside, and the surety was discharged.

---

---

Issues: Whether a surety bond that does not specify the date and time for production of the accused can be enforced to forfeit the bond amount.

Analysis: The bond conditions for a surety are penal in character and must be strictly construed. The statutory scheme requires the bond to state the time and place of attendance, and the surety's liability arises only from the terms of the surety bond itself. Where the bond is vague or silent on a material term such as the date and time for production, the Court cannot rely on surrounding circumstances or the accused's separate bail bond to fasten liability on the surety. Each bond is a distinct contract and must stand or fall on its own terms.

Conclusion: The forfeiture could not be sustained because the surety bond lacked a specific condition requiring production of the accused on a particular date and time.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded and the forfeiture order was set aside, with the surety discharged.

Ratio Decidendi: A surety bond imposing penal liability must be strictly construed, and forfeiture cannot be ordered unless the bond itself contains a clear and specific obligation capable of enforcement.

---