AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 468 words\
The counter petitioners in M.C.No.38/2004 and M.C.No.24/2004 in S.C.No.176/2001 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court I, Alappuzha, have filed Crl.Appeal Nos.1871 and 1872 of 2006, challenging the orders dated 03.11.2004, whereby they have been imposed with a penalty of ₹5,000/- each, as undertaken by them in the bonds executed before the committal court.
S.C.No.176 of 2001 was initiated against 6 accused, for offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, upon a charge sheet filed by the Circle Inspector of Police, Alappuzha North Police Station. The accused Nos.5 and 6 who had been arrested and released on bail, jumped the bail and were not available at the time of trial. The State had then filed petitions seeking action against the sureties under Section 446 of the Criminal Procedure Code. M.C.No.38 of 2004 is the proceedings initiated against the sureties of the 5th accused and M.C.No.24 of 2004 is the proceedings initiated against the 6th accused.
It is seen from the order that subsequent to the filing of the above petitions, the accused had appeared before the Court. However, since there was a violation of the bond conditions, the court below has issued the impugned orders, imposing the penalty of Rs.5,000/- on the appellants. It is aggrieved by the above order, the appellants have come up before this Court.
Heard Sri.George Mathew, learned counsel on behalf of the appellants in both the appeals and Smt.Sylaja, learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.
When the case had come up for orders today, the counsel for the appellants submitted that out of the 6 accused in the sessions case, the 1st accused is no more and the 2nd accused was absconding. It is submitted that the trial court had after trial, found the accused 1,3 and 4 guilty of the offences and convicted them and sentenced them. The accused 5 and 6, with respect to whom the appeals are concerned were acquitted by the trial court. It is also submitted that the accused who were found guilty had filed Crl.Appeal No. 1101 of 2005 before this Court and this Court had by judgment dated 18.2.2019 allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused 1,3 and 4 also of the offence. I have called for the judgment in Crl.Appeal No.1101 of 2005 and confirmed that the submission made by the counsel is factually correct. As such all the accused in the sessions case except the 2nd accused who was absconding stand acquitted as on today.
In the light of the subsequent events, I am of the opinion that the sureties need not be burdened with any further penalty.
In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of the court below is set aside. There will be no order as to costs.