Wasim Ahmad vs State of U.P.

B.A. Zaidi, J.—Appellant, Waseem Ahmad, who is being tried in Sessions Trial No. 1603 of 1999 pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Allahabad has come to this Court in appeal against the order dated 21.9.2007, vide which the trial Judge forfeited his personal bond and ordered him to deposit the amount of personal bond, which is Rs. 15,000.

Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, advocate for the Appellant and Sri V. P. Yadav, Addl. Government advocate for the State at the admission stage itself.

It can be noticed from the impugned order that the Appellant accused could not appear on 7.8.2007 in the Court which was fixed for arguments.

The reason assigned for his absence was that he suffered a knee fracture and therefore, he could not appear and his counsel was away in Delhi, had gone for treatment of his eyes.

The trial Judge found this reason insufficient and imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000 forfeiting his personal bond.

It may be noticed that ever since the commencement of trial, the accused was throughout attending the proceedings on the date fixed. It was almost for the first time that he and his counsel did not appear in Court.

The accused-applicant is thus not a chronic absentee. He has furnished an affidavit about factum of his leg injury and about the fact that his counsel had gone to Delhi for treatment of his eyes.

The trial court was, therefore, a little harsh in ordering forfeiture of the personal bond, and the grounds for being absent by him and his counsel should have been considered sufficient in the circumstances. In matters like these a little leniency is called for.

The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The order in question for forfeiting the personal bond is set aside. The bail bonds will survive.