Smt. Prema Bai vs State of M.P.

Brij Kishore Dubey, J.—This Criminal Appeal u/s 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the ''Code'') is preferred by the appellant herein/surety against the order dated 11.07.2013 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Gwalior in Criminal MJC No. 4/13. The background facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant herein had executed surety bond in a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the accused, Mayaram Rathore in Special Sessions Trial No. 165/2010. The accused/Mayaram Rathore failed to appear before the Trial Court on 16/09/2011 and, therefore, a non-bailable warrant was issued against him and subsequently on 27.02.2013, the accused appeared before the Trial Court and filed an application for granting him bail. The Trial Court rejected the application, however, this Court vide order dated 07.05.2013 passed in M. Cr. C. No. 1903/2013 allowed the application u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. but the Trial Court was directed to initiate proceedings under the provisions of Section 446 of Cr.P.C., therefore, the Trial Court initiated proceedings against the surety. The surety submitted a reply before the Trial Court. After hearing both the parties, the amount of surety bond, i.e., Rs. 25,000/- was forfeited and the appellant was directed to deposit the same, hence, this appeal.

Shri D.S. Kushwah, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merit and he confined his argument only to reduce the amount of recovery and to grant some time to deposit the amount on the ground that the appellant is poor lady of 60 years.

On the contrary, the learned Panel Lawyer supported the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

The accused/Mayaram Rathore did not appear before the Trial Court on 16/09/2011 and, therefore, non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against him for securing his presence before the Trial Court. The warrant has not been executed, however, the accused surrendered before the Trial Court on 27.02.2013 himself and he was taken into custody and remained under detention till his release i.e., 7.5.2013.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that an application for compromise of the matter has been filed by the complainant on the ground that the complainant wants to compound the offence which is pending.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feel that the ends of justice would be sub-served if only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is recovered from the forfeited surety bond of Rs. 25,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs. 15,000/- is remitted.

In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is allowed in part. The recovery of forfeited surety bond from the appellant is reduced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs. 15,000/- is remitted. The appellant is directed to deposit the aforesaid amount before the Court below within a period of one month from today failing which the Court below shall proceed in accordance with law. Certified copy as per rules.