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
7 paragraphs · 371 wordsKundan Singh, J.—Learned Counsel for the applicant has filed an affidavit today in Court.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant papers.
The applicant is one of the sureties of Akhtar who was being prosecuted under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The accused was absconding and could not be produced before .the Court for about six months though the applicant was granted time to produce him before the court. He made effective efforts in search of the accused but all in vain. The accused has died on 2111984 as stated in paragraph 6 of the affidavit of Zahiruddin, applicantsurety, filed in support of the revision. The learned Magistrate forfeited the surety bond and directed to realise the whole amount of surety by order dated 1061981 in Criminal Case No. 1186 of 1980. The appeal No. 158 of 1981 preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Magistrate has also been dismissed on 6101982 by the III Additional Sessions Judge.
The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant had taken effective steps to search out the accused and produce him before the court, but he failed as he could not know the whereabouts of the accused. The applicant had incurred huge amount in searching of the accused and suffered lot of agony. Learned Counsel for the applicant prayed for reduction of the amount forfeited instead of the whole amount of surety bond.
Considering the facts and circumstances that it is a case of 1980 and the applicant took effective steps to produce the accused before the court, he must have spent sufficient money and time for that purpose. In my opinion, if the amount of forfeiture is reduced to Rs. 500, that would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly this revision is allowed in part and the applicant is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 500/ (Rupees Five hundred only). The judgment and orders of the courts below is modified to the above extent regarding amount of forfeiture and the applicant is directed to deposit the said amount of Rs. 500/ within three months from todayin the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun.
Revision partly allowed.
