Gaya Prasad vs State of U.P.

S.K. Agarwal, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned A.G.A.

This appeal has been preferred against the order rejecting the application for recalling the order of forfeiture of the surety bond which was made and the direction to recover the amount was passed by the Court. However, against this order, no appeal is maintainable. Only a revision or an application u/s 482, Cr. P.C. can be preferred against this order.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant is permitted to convert this appeal into a revision.

This having done, the hearing of this revision is undertaken in respect of the present applicant.

According to the facts available from the order, the surety has got the absconding accused arrested from Bombay and brought to the Court. After production of the accused in the Court, he had made an application for recall of the order dated 20.9.1986. The application was rejected by the trial court vide its order dated 11.3.1987 on the ground that after final order for the recovery having been passed, the Court is functus officio and cannot pass any order reducing the amount or recall its own order.

In the circumstances, once the Court comes to the conclusion and has returned a finding of fact that he (surety) had not deliberately avoided to produce the accused in Court and because of their best efforts, the attendance of the accused can be procured by the Court. It was he who had visited Bombay and got main accused arrested by Bombay police.

Thus, it is apparent that the applicant had made sincere efforts to produce the accused in Court. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that he is an agricultural labour and with great difficulty meets two ends of his family.

Considering the above fact and circumstance, in my opinion, it is a fit case for remission of the amount of bond imposed by the trial court. The amount of bond is Rs. 3,000 and the entire amount was directed to be recovered from him.

In the circumstances, I find it expedient in the interest of justice that the amount be reduced to Rs. 1,000 from Rs. 3,000.

The applicant is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,000 fixed by this Court within two months from today.

With this modification, this revision application is partly allowed.