Crime No.464/2016 Of Rajapuram ... vs By Advs
2021 Latest Caselaw 9504 Ker

CRL.A.No.166 OF 2021          1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

    MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

                       CRL.A.No.166 OF 2021

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 131/2017 DATED 15-03-2019 OF
   ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - I, KASARAGOD

    CRIME NO.464/2016 OF Rajapuram Police Station , Kasargod


APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS/SURETIES

      1      ABDUL RAHIMAN
             AGED 61 YEARS
             S/O. MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT EDAKKAVU, POODAMKALLU,
             KALLAR VILLAGE, VELLARIKUNDU TALUK, KASARAGOD
             DISTRICT.

      2      MUHAMMED SIRAJ
             AGED 32 YEARS
             S/O. ABDUL KHADER, RESIDING AT ENIYADI, BANDADKKA,
             KARIVEEDAKAM VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD
             DISTRICT.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.T.MADHU
             SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAULAM-682 031.

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER RAJAPURAM POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671

531.

OTHER PRESENT:

S.AMBIKA DEVI- SPL.P.P

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

FGJUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellants who are the

sureties of the sole accused in S.C.No.131 of 2017 pending before the

learned Additional Sessions Court -I, Kasaragod .

2. While the case was pending the accused failed to appear

before the trial court and thereafter the court below has issued notice

to the sureties and proceedings were initiated against them to forfeit

the bond executed by them. Though they appeared before the court

and offered explanation, the court below was not satisfied with the

explanation submitted by these petitioners, the sureties of the

accused. So they were directed to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- each as

penalty.

3. Aggrieved by the said order of the court below dated

15.3.2019 in M.C proceedings initiated against them, this appeal has

been preferred by the appellants/sureties.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the

learned Public Prosecutor.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that

after the proceedings initiated under Section 446 of Cr.P.C the accused

surrendered and now he is regularly appearing before the court and

attending the proceedings. It is submitted by the learned counsel for

the petitioners that they are coming from poor financial background

and the penalty imposed on them is exorbitant. Hence, they prayed for

some leniency of this Court regarding the payment of penalty imposed

by the court below.

6. On going through the records, it could be seen that the court

below has directed them to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- each. As the

accused is now regularly appearing before the court below and trial

has already started, I think that in the interest of justice the amount

imposed on them as penalty can be reduced especially considering the

pandemic situation. Therefore the amount of penalty imposed upon

this petitioners to a sum of Rs.35,000/- each is reduced and they are

directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- each before the court below

within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the copy of this

order.

7. If the penalty amount is not paid or not been recovered they

have to be in civil jail for a term which may extend to 15 days.

Accordingly, Crl.Appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

smm