Chatra Ram Jat, J. - (1.) These appeal is directed against the common judgment and order dated 12.7.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Udaipur, whereby he refused to drop the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. against the appellant Gayad Singh and ordered to recover Rs. 5000/, Rs. 5000/- (total Rs. 10,000/-) respectively i.e. half of the amount of surety bonds from the appellant Gayad Singh and half of the amount of personal bond from Smt. Teji Bai Rs. 5, 000/- and from Radhey Shyam Singh Rs. 10,000/-.
(2.) The prosecution story is woven like this:- (i) Appellant Gayad Singh stood himself as surety to accused appellants Radheyshyam Singh and Smt. Teji who were facing trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Udaipur. (ii) After grant of bail, accused appellants Radhey Shaym and Smt. Teji did not appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Udaipur because they went to Gujarat for earning their livelihood. Due to nonappearance of Radhey Shyam Singh and Smt. Teji, the learned Additional Sessions Judge forfeited the bail bonds and ordered for initiating proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. (iii) That, thereafter on 12.7.2006 accused Radhey Shyam and Smt. Teji Bai surrendered before the learned trial Court and moved application under Section 446(3) for dropping the proceedings initiated against them and stated that they went to Gujarat for earning their livelihood. (iv) The learned trial Court partly allowed the application and ordered that half of the amount of surety bonds of appellant Gayad Singh i.e. 5000/- and 5000/- as penalty and for recovery of half of the amount of the personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- of Smt. Teji and Rs. 20,000/- of Radhey Shyam Singh. Hence, this appeal for quashing the order of the learned trial Court.
(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned order of the learned trial Court as well as record of the case.;