1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Revision No. 1323 of 2008)
Date of Decision: 16.7.2009
***
Harnek Singh
.. Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab.
.. Respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,
Present:- Mr. D.K. Kaushal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab
***
ARVIND KUMAR, J.
The petitioner stood surety for one Dalip Kumar, an accused in
case FIR No. 105 dated 5.7.2003, under Sections 420, 506 IPC, Police
Station City, Kotkapura, who subsequently did not appear before the Court
and has been declared as proclaimed offender. The petitioner was served
with a notice under Section 446 Cr.P.C. but having failed to produce the
accused despite availing time for the same, the learned Magistrate imposed
the penalty of Rs.50,000/- equivalent to the amount of surety bond and
asked for recovery of the same by initiating proceedings.
In an appeal preferred by the surety-petitioner, the learned
Sessions Judge, though reduced the amount of fine to Rs.25000/-, but
imposed a rider that the surety has to produce the accused on or before
15.2.2008, otherwise his appeal shall be deemed to be dismissed. The
petitioner, however, failed to produce the accused before the Court below
Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the
extent that the condition/ rider, as imposed, be waived off.
Heard. There is breach of condition of surety bond on the part
of the petitioner. But there is nothing on record which is suggestive of the
fact that the petitioner had any remote scent that the accused is preparing to
escape from the trial or he had connived with the accused jumping out the
2
bail. Keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner, the instant revision
petition is disposed of with the modification in the order passed by the
learned Sessions Judge that the condition imposed upon the petitioner shall
be waived off and the penalty of Rs.25,000/- as reduced by the appellate
Court below be deposited by him within a period of two months. In case of
failure on the part of the petitioner to deposit the fine amount, the instant
revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, without there
being any effect on the recovery proceedings of the original amount of
Rs.5,0000/- initiated against the petitioner.
(ARVIND KUMAR)
JUDGE
July 16,2009
Jiten