AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sreenivas Harish Kumar, J
Heard Sri M.S.Shyam Sundar, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
Delay can be condoned, but the appeal is found to be not maintainable. The appellant has challenged the order dated 09.12.2021 in Crl.RP No.825/2019. It appears that the appellant questioned the order of the Magistrate issuing proclamation and forfeiting of the bail bond by preferring criminal revision petition before the Sessions Court under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. The Sessions Court has held that appeal should have been preferred under Section 449 of Cr.P.C. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge.
This appeal is preferred challenging the order in a revision petition against which the appeal is not maintainable. Sri M.S.Shyam Sundar, learned senior counsel submits that if liberty is given to the appellant, he will appear before the Magistrate and apply for bail.
Merely because proclamation is issued, it does not mean that the appellant being accused cannot appear and apply for bail. Certainly learned Magistrate may enlarge the appellant/accused on bail. Hence the appeal is dismissed. Liberty is given to the appellant to appear before the Magistrate and apply for bail. If application for bail is made, the same shall be considered and disposed of at the earliest.
IA No.1/2022 for stay does not survive for consideration. It stands disposed of accordingly.