AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The revision petitioners were the sureties for the release of the second accused on bail in S.T.No.28/2006. The second accused did not appear
before the Magistrate Court on 16.10.2008 when the case was posted for judgment. In the said circumstances, the Magistrate Court issued notice to
the revision petitioners on being satisfied that the bail bond had been forfeited.
The revision petitions appeared before the Magistrate Court on receipt of the notice. However, they did not submit any explanation to the show
cause notice. In the said circumstances, the Magistrate Court imposed a penalty of Rs.50,000/- each on each of the revision petitioners. The appellate
court modified the penalty to Rs.10,000/- each.
Heard.
It appears that the second accused was not present before the court on the day when the judgment was pronounced. In the said circumstances, the
Magistrate Court was justified in issuing notice to the revision petitioners on being satisfied that the bail bond had been forfeited. No explanation was
given by the revision petitioners to the show cause notice issued. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am fully satisfied that the
Magistrate Court was justified in imposing penalty on the revision petitioners.
In S.T.No.28/2006, the second accused was convicted and sentenced under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears from order
dated 21.12.2009 in C.M.P.No.3279/2009 in Crl.Appeal No.907/2008 that during the pendency of the appeal before the Additional Sessions Court,
Trivandrum, the matter was settled by the parties.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the fact that the matter was settled subsequent to the passing of the order by the
Magistrate Court, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to modify and reduce the penalty imposed by the appellate court, to meets the ends of
justice. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition stands allowed, modifying and reducing the penalty imposed by the appellate court and the revision
petitioners are directed to pay a penalty of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) each under Section 446(3) Cr.P.C.
Needless to state that if the revision petitioners had already deposited any amount before the Magistrate Court in connection with this case, the said
amount will be adjusted against the penalty imposed. If the revision petitioners had already deposited any excess amount, the revision petitioners are
entitled to reimbursement of the excess amount from the court concerned.