IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRL.A.No. 766 of 2009()
1. AMMAD HAJI, VADAKKE CHEEROTH,
... Petitioner
2. MATHATH SOOPI HAJI,PADITHARAMMEL HOUSE,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THROUGH
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :21/04/2009
O R D E R
THOMAS.P. JOSEPH, J.
-------------------------------
Crl. Appeal No.766 of 2009
-------------------------------
Dated this the 21st April, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the
learned Public Prosecutor who took notice for the respondent,
State.
2. The appeal arises from the order dated 3.2.2009
in M.C.No.69/08 in S.C.No.359 of 2008 of the Court of Special
Judge (NDPS Act cases), Vadakara imposing penalty of
Rs.10,000/= each on the appellants for non-performance of the
conditions of the surety bond executed by them. Learned counsel
for the appellants submit that as per Annexures 1 and 2 orders,
the case against the accused was allowed to be withdrawn by the
same court under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
and that the impugned order was passed subsequent to the order
granting withdrawal under Section 321 of Code of Criminal
Procedure. According to the learned counsel, the application for
withdrawal of the case was pending and that is why the accused
did not appear in the court below on the relevant date.
Crl.A.No.766 of 2009
2
3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there
was a direction to the appellants to produce the accused on
23.12.2008 and that was not complied.
4. It is not in dispute that appellants were not able
to cause production of the accused in the court below, as directed
by the court on 23.12.2008. Therefore, the subsequent
withdrawal of the case by itself did not mean that there was no
failure to comply with the conditions of the surety bond.
However, taking into account the fact that the case itself has
been withdrawn, I am inclined to think that the penalty of
Rs.1500/= each is sufficient in the interest of justice.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in part,
modifying the penalty payable by the appellants as Rs.1500/=
(Rupees One Thousand Five Hundred only) each and in default of
payment, to undergo detention in civil prison for one week each.
THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
JUDGE.
nj.