JUDGMENT 1. - Admit. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. for the State. 3. The petitioner was released on bail by order dated 13-9-74 of the learned A.M.J.M. (1) (South) Kota. Thereafter, on 14-1-80, the learned A.M.J.M. (1) (South) Kota, ordered the forfeiture of the bail bonds and warrant of arrest of the petitioner was issued. The petitioner submitted an application us. 447, P.C., before the learned Judicial Magistrate (4), Kota, where the case was transferred. The learned Magistrate vide h;s order dated admitted his application. The petitioner has moved this Court under section 452, Cr. P.C. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate and the petitioner surrendered before him with the request that fresh surety be taken in accordance with the directions of the against order, as provided in Section 447. Cr. P.C. In support of his contention. He has cited W.L.N. 1981 (U.C.) 40 (Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan) . I have gone through this case cited by the learned counsel fat the petitioner and have given doubtful consideration to the arguments advanced by him. This citation is applicable to the present case. 5. Section 447, Cr. P.C. provides that when any bond is forfeited under the provisions of Section 446, Cr P.C., the Magistrate who demanded such surety may order to furnish fresh surety in accordance with the directions of the original order. It means that when a bond is forfeited, and the accused requests the court to furnish fresh surety, then it empowers the learned Magistrate to pass necessary order and demand fresh surety from the accused in accordance with the directions of original order. The learned Magistrate has erred in dismissing the application submitted by the petitioner. Whatever reason he has mentioned in the order is not correct. Section 447, Cr. P.C. empowers the Magistrate to demand fresh surety in accordance with the directions of the original order. The petitioner has surrendered before the learned Magistrate and, requested to pass necessary orders in accordance with the provisions laid down under section 447, Cr. P.C. 6. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the learned Judl. Section 447, Cr. P.C. empowers the Magistrate to demand fresh surety in accordance with the directions of the original order. The petitioner has surrendered before the learned Magistrate and, requested to pass necessary orders in accordance with the provisions laid down under section 447, Cr. P.C. 6. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the learned Judl. Magistrate No. 4 Kota on 5-4-83 in case No. 439/82 is set aside, and it is directed that the learned Magistrate will take fresh surety of Rs. 4000/-and a personal bond of the same amount from the petitioner to his satisfaction. On furnishing fresh surety and bail bond as aforesaid, the petitioner against whom warrant of arrest has been issued and who is in jail, shall be released. 7. This Misc. petition is decided accordingly.Petition accepted. *******