JUDGMENT 1. From perusal of the record, it is clear that vide order dated 10/5/2013, the proceedings under section 446 of Cr.P.C. were initiated against present respondent, who stood surety for the accused-appellant-Rajesh Dangi in Cri. Appeal No. 413 of 2004, on account of absence of the accused before the registry on the fixed date of his appearance. 2. It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the surety that appellant Rajesh Dangi on his own appeared before this court on 23/10/2013 from where he was directed to be taken into custody and since then he is in jail. Therefore, it is prayed that considering these facts, the proceedings initiated against the surety may be dropped. 3. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and after perusal of the entire record, in the opinion of this court, the prayer made aforesaid appears to be reasonable. 4. Accordingly, the proceedings are hereby dropped. The petition stands disposed of in terms of these observations/directions.