High Court Kerala High Court

Gopinathan vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
Gopinathan vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL.A.No. 1571 of 2009()


1. GOPINATHAN, S/O. KESAVAN,TOWNSHIP
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. RAJEEV @ RAJAN, S/O. RAJAN, T.C.41/1379

3. CHANDRAN,S/O. SUKUMARAN NADAR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.HARILAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :04/08/2009

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
               = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
               Crl. Appeal NO. 1571 OF 2009
               = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
         Dated this the 4th day of August, 2009.

                        J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the

Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram

in M.C.39/08 in S.C.186/05. The first respondent in the M.C.

was released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs.25,000/- by

the sureties who is the present appellant before me. As the

accused did not appear notice was issued to the sureties to

produce the accused. They failed to produce him. But I am

informed that later he was present before Court and was

released on bail. The Court forfeited the entire bond amount

and directed the sureties to pay some amount as penalty . It

is against that decision the sureties have come up with this

appeal.

2. The learned counsel would contend that there was

no deliberate intention for the sureties to help the accused to

evade his presence before Court. Learned also would contend

that they are not having strong financial position also and

therefore prays for maximum leniency.

Crl. Appeal NO. 1571 OF 2009
-:2:-

3. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. As it

has turned out that the accused has appeared before Court

and later was released on bail I feel certain leniency can be

shown in the matter for the reasons stated in the previous

lines. I think justice can be met by reducing the penalty from

Rs.25,000/- to Rs.10,000/- of the appellant and the 3rd

counter petitioner in the M.C. is directed to pay the amount on

or before 31.10.2009 failing which he may have to undergo

imprisonment in civil prison for a period of six weeks.

The Crl.Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-