*W"WWW"*W"WMMWMWWMfwwwwwwfifiwrmmmwmmmmrwwmmwwwzurfififimfifififififiwfiflwfifflfiflfimwwfiflfiE%$%fl$§%?0FK&Wfiflflflfifififi
IN THE HIGH COURT 0? xAR&A?AxA AT shfisaaafiaj
nnwsn THIS THE 28"' an? ex 3353 2Qa$u = f w
agrees . '
was HfiN'ELE ma.aus?xcE-x.R£xAs&§1 "-f.'
rznn-man APPEAL :a1t:,e:§§.i;?"2crr§a ,
BE'I'i'EEN:
M MOHAMHEQ :1
5/0 LATE HnsnNAasA'_*a ._ ,.v~
AG£Zi} ABOUT 39 Yexaas,"
RKAT H.xc.1«125, HW'._ , u --~. »,_~
Annua, MANsAL§ag wgLuK;g .*,%_'? ;';.. eawzwzousa
(By sri;-svsfiéigxai_§fiyzJA?KuMAéV9 9, ADVS)
THE sTATE'0€*K£RHATAKA
RE9ERS$TN$B:aY,sPfi,
;B?_$AJPB»EfiLICE,
j'MAHG&LoaE'TALua,
'"n;x;n:a1RIcT ... awssawnanw
".; '(fig s:i;]HAxuxANTxAahYAe9A, HCE? 3
7 .C§L.A ETLER uzs.449 CR.EA2 av THE AQVGCATE
F'0R3'P'I-EE .3.P'E'ELl.@-.N'E' PRAYING THEE THI3 HC¥N'BI.:EI CQURT
V' " I BE FLEASESD Ti} REBEFCE T}-{E fi.FC*Rfi'-1535'!' IGNEI3
GE' B.S..Z§,B83f- GRDERED BY THE E'RL.S.J,
' "MANGA!.s€>RE2 IN CRLJEIS . C2'-$352 NE}. 66333? HATED
29-4-2098
END GFL§H’£’ SUCH OWHER ANE3 FIIRTHER
RELIEF.
THIS RPPEAE: CCIHING :35: F019. £’&IJHI3SIG!i ‘1″H°I3
BAY, THE CQHRT B$LIIVEB.E2E3 THE FQLLQYING»:
WW LWUNE W9″ §i%§€Ni%§fi%§%fl@ §”%E5I£.M”‘3 %%2?$:*m§’~’§§fi WT i’&$*%%NW%.%§~%%M’%. mxww MWMWE W5″ méammmnmmm. mlwn W…-Magma M5″ mmmkmmgmfiwm mauvurva Mwwmw “h..¢>’5t emwmwawmmwww mnwm »w’~’a
I H D GIIIE I T
Thnugh this matter %
admission; with the c:;$naé :it3 t;«f*
advacate for the §q;=peli’as.:’§t».
High Court Goverx:me3’:ii:..:VFlaaci1é::,°’Tt’he. ;gsé§£tar is
taken up for
2. This.f’2gape:a;i””‘ the appellant-
uuretgy’ “penalty mwunt. of
e§i&~=.s..,:>:§’.’ci-araaci ta ha recezvsarad
thflé”:’j’-fipyé-3#_;&n’t’; as per cards: dated
29.<iii4.._V2a?.0:$' ._'4V1::'§im':_é<i by the learned Saasiona
lfikzgggpszra in Criminal Misc. N.66fU’2£3D7
‘ –..i11._v’S,p*_~2.V§.§ia_l Case r=.ro.26.I20ca5.
ifiéarding to the aypellant, the asgpellant
_ _ S.tvr§&ad $3 surety ta the absccznciing aatrzrzused
–.’..§-Iohatmrsed. Shameam in 8133.. Case No.26f2I3G5 and
has axe-cxuted a surety band far Rs.2E:,0GG!-
undeztaking that he weulti keep the accused
present befara the cracmrt an all the dates at
__ _:V,:’
‘
-»-or
Mx(a””2aifi>z« W«”*«r 91 rs*”‘»oMw””\’A an M fimflk 5:
S-aetiacm 4-§6{3] before the Court belcrw -2-mfs7*
rejected. fiance, this appeal with a.
reduce the gzenalty amount.
4. The: leazzned High Camct:
vehemently argued that th_e1″‘~… ap1:él:J.aa::;t
stc-a-:5. as surety tea as “.’i.T.::”::§Ars:: ;;§-zraci.
in th& héinoua crffV«$ r1£:.a- Act
which is an v;3:ff,_a;nc2§i” the
Scciety “«gVV§aVs;1′:’a;’r;ra’t:icz’z. On
account tha younger
gannrat1;§z§n’- addicted to bad
habits of conx%1iiug{tia£i._a§> f’f_ éruga. at
the7,4.t;§1g gfii; ma vary appellant
had – a’EfiiqS’avit stating that ha owns a
:3§*’~’§A¢i§:a::tisf’I§&rtVii”«£¥,;=§;A’3;V$’V5(3;C«UOl~. Theradfare, the
Ccuéézft. right in rejecting his
‘,a;:a.;t_::.Vl ;’iLfiaw%:5’L<::z~z.." far remission off than penalty
n'§:"fI»fiAa.25,0€I$f* and he baa not made aw
.T§1'.£:$1'$;éE to t1:a.c-an the accusad and produce
he fre the tzeurt. Haanme, aubmitteci that the
0%” Q?’ ¥”§.§35§zW:.%5″§Jf33¥t«?u”§55:\i§”ius?33?A Mfimw ‘u,.~’5v..aW»J§@$ W?” WMWBWMEMWM %”§Fa\a’?7E”£ %.WqJVMW:B ‘MW’ §M%mtm.M:.n:Wm”w”m mwmwnsz ‘unvuaevwmxc Wa-
Wm: Mwwma mus” xxmwwfitémmm WWW? %%Jtm”fifi WW wmwmmm WEWM %….’W.m”m” WE” %&KN%%.§”$%,%»??K Wfiwfi %lL?W’ ¥{.a@’»%fi%&E”%§’~i.&% §”i§%%f camera” {W K&WNi9€¥”i§Kfi WW5″ W
discretion given tea the Trial Caurt has 1fi.::;t
been proyerly exercised.
consideration tha attawt made” __
egapellant to trace the ii»
stood as surety, the appagl i’:3 1′:’:2 be a;é;liv’d:éaz:5t.. “‘A
6. For the fiaragqing is
allewed. The penéiiifiyi gfiaigned to be
rnaccaverzaad £r;c.%fe:§’ tuna at
Rs . 25%,%:$:o;¥;: ;’;a:=.j_ .«_i_;t°a:<;i:z.";:é';;1" Rs . 15, 900%. He
gnenalty ammznt at
1§A,1'5', eVt2'§i:;*T§ : Sc ciays frcra the aate of
zeceéwiigi: . of this Grder. Eailing
" entire penalty amunt of
–.1§.s._,V25v;.§¥.3{};f- shall be recavered frcm tha
” . h fit .
Sé/-J
E33
rngzkf-*