Naheed Ara Moonis, J. - (1.) THE instant appeal has been preferred by the sureties under Section 449 Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment and order dated 14.2.2011, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. -II, District Jaunpur in Criminal Case No. 20 of 2010 State v. Banarasi and Anr, arising out of case crime No. 460 of 2008, State v. Achche Lal, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 413 IPC, P.S. Mungara Badshahpur, District Jaunpur.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Appellants, the learned AGA and perused the record. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned AGA, this appeal is being finally disposed of at the stage of admission.
(3.) THE relevant facts leading to the appeal is that the Appellants are stood sureties for an accused, Achche Lal, in case crime No. 460 of 2008, State v. Achche Lal, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 413 IPC, P.S. Mungara Badshahpur, District Jaunpur. On account of non appearance of the accused on the date fixed the court below has issued the notices against the Appellants. Later on the accused appeared before the court as is evident from the order sheet of the case. The accused Achche Lal was appearing and attending the court regularly, but a separate case under Section 446 Code of Criminal Procedure was registered against the Appellants as Criminal Case No. 20 of 2010, and on 1.10.2010 the bail bonds of the Appellants were forfeited and a notice for recovery was issued against them. The Appellants moved an application for recalling the order dated 1.10.2010 as the accused is already appearing and attending the court, therefore, the notices may be discharged. But the aforesaid application was rejected by the court below by an order dated 14.2.2011, on the ground that the proceedings were held up on account of non appearance of the accused and the State has suffered loss, hence there is no merit in the application to recall the order, therefore it is rejected.;