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
4 paragraphs · 235 wordsPritpal Singh, J.
The petitioner Gurcharan Singh stood surety for accused Raghbir Singh who was being tried under Section 25 of the Arms Act in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sunam. He had furnished the surety bond in the sum of Rs. 4000/ undertaking to produce the accused in Court on each date of hearing. The accused failed to appear in Court on 5.12.1983. The trial Court, therefore, issued notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why the amount of bond should not be recovered from him. The petitioner appeared before the Court but failed to produce the accused. The trial Court, therefore, ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 4000/ as penalty. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was heard by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur. The appellate Court reduced the amount of penalty to Rs. 3000/. Against the order of the appellate Court the petitioner has filed the present revision.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner prayed for reduction in the quantum of penalty. Admittedly the accused has absconded and has been declared as a proclaimed offender. It, however, appears that the petitioner has made every effort to search the accused in order to produce him before the Court. In these circumstances the amount of penalty which is to be recovered from the petitioner is further reduced to Rs. 2000/. This revision is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGMENT accordingly.