ORDER :- Challenging the order dated 19.12.2008 in M.P. No.878 of 2007 in M.C. No.109 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the Trial of JHCBBC-cum-Additional Family Court-cum-XXIII Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad, the present criminal petition is filed. 2. The petitioners herein filed the application to pay the bail bond amount of Rs.5,000/- in execution proceedings of a Maintenance Case, to them, instead of forfeiting the same to the Government, but, the same was rejected by the Court below and the bail bond amount was ordered to be forfeited to the Government. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that, the bail bond was executed in pursuance of a non-boilable warrant issued in execution proceedings in the Maintenance Case, and as it is not a case falling under the general penal provisions, the amount, which was given towards bond, has to be paid to the petitioner instead of forfeiting to the Government. 4. On the ground that the only procedure available is to forfeit the amount to the Government, the trial Court dismissed the application. There is no dispute about that aspect, because when a bond executed by the surety is to be forfeited, the amount will be confiscated to the Government in anyone of the penal provisions. But, here, it is a case where the bond was executed by a surety for due attendance of the respondent husband, in maintenance proceedings. Therefore, in the circumstances, the amount should go to the petitioners, but it has to be appropriated towards maintenance amount. 5. The criminal petition is, accordingly allowed setting aside the impugned order and directing the trial Court to refund the surety amount of Rs.5,000/- to the petitioners and the same shall be appropriated towards part of the maintenance.