JUDGMENT 1. - All these three cases are disposed of by one common order. 2. The petitioner had stood surety in cases, which had been started under Section 54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act & Section 20 (b) (i) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The said accused did not appear in the Court and absconded. The warrants were issued and proceedings have been drawn under Section 446 Cr.P.C. Notice was given to the petitioner as to show cause why the amount of surety bond of Rs. 3,000/- in each case should be forfeited. The petitioner filed reply. The contentions raised by him were negative by the trial court and the trial court ordered the forfeiture of the bond and recover all the entire amount Rs. 3,000/- totalling to Rs. 9,000/-. He filed an appeal against the said order, but without any success. He has approached this Court by way of filing this revision petitions. 3. In normal course, this Court in slow to interfere in revisional jurisdiction in the matter like one, but certain cases are always exception to these proposition. It is born out from the material shown to him, that the accused is in the evening of his life being 70 years old and is totally incapacitated out to due de-generate are thrites of the right knee. A medical certificate to this extent has been placed on record. Learned counsel has also shown to the Court the results of the various investigation, which have been carried out in various hospitals of the country, including one Lok-Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital, New Delhi. It is also born out from the Hospital records of the petitioner that he went to Assam and there too he had fallen sick. Learned counsel has submitted that he has gone in search of the accused upto Assam a Nagaland, but he could not apprehend them despite his best efforts. It is submitted that he is a poor man, who is unable to do any job due to his old age and the amount of bond may be reduced. 4. I have given my thoughtful submission and perused the entire papers placed before me. The petitioner is an old man, who is totally incapacitated and his financial condition is not very-good as he is unable to do any work. 5. 4. I have given my thoughtful submission and perused the entire papers placed before me. The petitioner is an old man, who is totally incapacitated and his financial condition is not very-good as he is unable to do any work. 5. In this view of the matter and in my opinion ends of justice would meet in case the amount forfeited is reduced to Rs. 1,000/- in each case. The revision-petitions, therefore, succeed partly, instead of forfeiture of Rs. 3,000/- in each case, it would be Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) making a total of Rs. 3,000/-(Rupees three thousand only). Three months time is granted to deposit the same. *******