Rajan Pillai vs State of Kerala

V.K. Mohanan, J.—The appellant herein is one of the sureties for the accused in S.C. No. 864 of 2008 of the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Adhoc)-II, Kollam and the present appeal is preferred challenging the order dated 31.7.2012 in M.C. No. 45 of 2012 in S.C. No. 864 of 2008 by which the trial court imposed penalty of ` 15,000/- on the above appellant u/s 446 Cr. P.C. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that accused No. 9, for whom the appellant stood as one of the sureties, has subsequently appeared before the court below and he is facing the trial, and therefore the order of the trial court is liable to be set aside or else, the appellant is entitled to get a lenient approach while fixing the penalty amount.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and I have gone through the order impugned in this appeal.

The appellant being one of the sureties is contractually obliged to produce A9 for whom he stood as one of the sureties. The appellant has no satisfactory explanation for his failure in producing the accused-A9. The appellant has no contention that the trial court has committed any illegalities in issuing the order under challenge. On going through the impugned order it appears to me that, the trial court has complied with all the procedural formalities while imposing the penalty amount against the appellant. In the absence of any contra contention, I am of the view that, there is no need to interfere with the findings of the court below fixing the liability on the appellant u/s 446 of Cr. P.C.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the accused for whom the appellant stood as one of the sureties, is subsequently appeared before the court below and he is facing the trial. If that be so, according to me, while confirming the liability of the appellant u/s 446 of Cr. P.C., the penalty amount can be reduced. Hence, according to me, an amount of ` 7,500/- (Rupees seven thousand and five hundred only) will be sufficient to meet the ends of justice in the light of the facts and circumstances involved in the case. Accordingly, while confirming the liability of the appellant u/s 446 of Cr. P.C., as found by the trial court, the penalty amount can be modified and reduced to ` 7,500/- and accordingly the appellant is directed to pay a sum of ` 7,500/- being the penalty amount u/s 446 of Cr. P.C. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has already deposited a sum of ` 7,500/- vide receipt dated 17.11.2012 in terms of the order of this Court dated 19.10.2012 in Crl. M.A. No. 7722 of 2012 and the said amount may be ordered to be adjusted against the revised penalty amount. I find no reason to reject the above request but the same requires positive consideration. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Adhoc)-II, Kollam that, the amount of ` 7,500/- that already deposited by the appellant in the trial court, as evidenced by the receipt dated 17.11.2012, be adjusted against the penalty amount now revised and fixed by this court. As the appellant has already deposited the revised penalty amount, the coercive steps if any initiated against the appellant shall stands cancelled. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.