Zamil and Another vs State of U.P.

Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.—This is a sureties appeal against an order dated 22.4.2008 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Aligarh for issuance of recovery warrant against them for realisation of the surety amount.

Heard Sri Akhilesh Srivastava, advocate, for the Appellants and Mohd. Israil Siddiqui, Additional Government Advocate, for the State at the admission stage itself in this appeal.

The accused Iqbal in Crl. Case No. 78 of 2006, u/s 18/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station, Civil Lines, Aligarh was to appear in Court on 11.10.2006. He did not appear and the bail bonds were forfeited and the notices were issued to the sureties.

The sureties informed the Court that the accused was in Ludhiyana jail. The accused was summoned from there and appeared in Court.

However, there is no averment from the sureties, that the accused was in Ludhiyana Jail, when he was supposed to appear in Court. The consequences is that the accused absented himself on one date and it is for this reason that the sureties have to be penalised.

It has to be noticed that the sureties informed the Court that the accused was in Ludhiyana Jail from where he was summoned and this is an extenuating factor. The sureties have to be penalised for the non-appearance of the accused for one day, and asking them to pay the entire amount of bail bonds for this purpose would be asking too much.

In a situation like this, only token fine must be deemed appropriate, and in the circumstance of the case, a penalty of Rs. 500 for each surety must suffice.

As such, Rs. 500 only will be realised as penalty from each of the sureties.

Appeal allowed to that extent.