R.K.Singh - (1.) NONE responds even on the revised list. The revision petition is 12 years old so it is taken up for consideration and decision with the help of materials available on record. Perused the impugned judgment dated 21.1.1984 challenged in the revision petition.
(2.) THE revisionist wing surety of the accused Nikhat Habib is legally obliged to ensure accused's appearance before the court or to forfeit surety amount of the bail bonds. The impugned order speaks the same and for the same reason the prayer of the revisionist was refused by the revisional court dated 21.1.1984. The revision petition was filed against the same order which does not disclose any illegality or irregularity in the eyes of law or facts. The impugned order is perfectly justified. The revision petition accordingly, fails and is dismissed. The interim order if any will stand vacated.;