MOHD SAFI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-1991-1-47
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on January 09,1991

MOHD SAFI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

B. R. ARORA, J. - (1.) THIS misc. petition is directed against the order dated 17th August 1990 passed by the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate First Class, Deedwana, by which the learned Magistrate ordered for the forfeiture of the full amount of the surety bonds.
(2.) ACCUSED Jallaluddin was facing trial in criminal case no. 67/83 in which the petitioner stood surety and filed a surety in the sum of Rs. 3,000/-ACCUSED Jallaluddin did not appear before the court on 17-3-90 and therefore the court ordered for the forfeiture of the full amount of bail bonds and surety bonds. An application under section 446 (3) Cr. P. C. was moved by the petitioner before the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate first Class for remitting the penalty who by his order dated 17th August 1990 rejected the application. It is against this order the present petition under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. It is contended on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner that the accused Jallaluddin has gone out of India and he was, therefore, unable to produce the accused. This submission was made before the learned lower Court but the learned lower Court did not acceded to the request. In support of his case, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Dayal Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan (1 ). In that case also the accused left India and the surety could not produce the accused and this Court held that no negligence or connivance can be attributed to the surety and, therefore, though the forfeiture was maintained but the amount of forfeiture was reduced from Rs. 5000/- to Rs. 4000/- The Facts of the present case are identical to Dayal Chand's case (Supra ). In this case also the accused left India without any information or knowledge of the petitioner and as such no negligence can be attributed to the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, I maintain the order of forfeiture passed by the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate First Class Deedwana, but reduce the amount of penalty from Rs. 3000/- to Rs. 2400/ -. The misc. petition is therefore, partly allowed and the amount of penalty as stated above is partly remitted. .;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.