Kerala High Court
Muthu vs State Of Kerala on 5 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.A NO. 532 OF 2024
CRIME NO.2472/2020 OF Adoor Police Station,
Pathanamthitta
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.558 OF 2022 OF
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPELLANT/S:
1 MUTHU
AGED 40 YEARS
W/O SHAJI, VADAKKETHALACKAL HOUSE,
ATHIKKATTUKULANGARA MURI, ATHIKKATTUKULANGARA
P.O., PALAMEL VILLAGE,MAVELIKARA TALUK,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504
2 SHAMNA N.S
AGED 38 YEARS
W/O SALAM SALIM, PALAVILA VEEDU, MALOOR COLLEGE
P.O, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN -
689695
BY ADVS.
S.K.SAJI
SAGITH KUMAR V.
DEVAPRIYA S.
C.B.SREEKUMAR
N.REJO
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
PUSHPALATHA MK....SR GP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.Appeal No.532 of 2024
2
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
...........................................
Crl.Appeal No.532 of 2024
..........................................................
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2024
JUDGMENT
This is a petition filed by the appellants under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. The appellants are the sureties of the 3 rd accused in SC No.558 of 2023, pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge- II, Pathanamthitta. The appellants failed to produce the 3 rd accused as obliged by the bail bond they had executed. Hence, the trial court initiated the proceedings and imposed the penalty. It is seen that notice was given to the appellants, but they did not file any explanation. In the circumstances, the impugned order directing imposition of penalty cannot be said to be wrong or illegal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submit that considering the financial and social conditions of the appellants, a lenient view ought to have been taken by the trial court. The 3 rd accused is the husband of the 2nd appellant. It is submitted that the 3rd accused is now abroad and would appear before the court Crl.Appeal No.532 of 2024 3 soon. It appears that the non appearance of the 3rd accused is not a purposeful abscondance from the process of court.
5. Taking all such aspects into account, the amount of penalty is reduced to Rs.15,000/-.
The appeal is therefore, allowed in part and the appellants are ordered to pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- each.
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE Dxy Crl.Appeal No.532 of 2024 4 APPENDIX OF CRL.A 532/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 ORDER DATED 27.12.2023 IN MC.53/2023 IN S.C 558/2022 OF THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-II, PATHANAMTHITTA