Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1698 (ALL)

Amerika v. State of U. P.

2017-07-20

SATYA NARAIN AGNIHOTRI

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Taken up. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Government Advocate express willingness that this matter be decided at this stage of admission of appeal. The proposal of learned counsel for the parties is acknowledged and the appeal is being finally decided at the stage of admission, because there is no need to summon the record of learned Trial Judge. 3. This appeal under Section 449 Cr.P.C. has been instituted by appellant No.1 Amerika and appellant No.2 Ram Lakhan against the judgment and order dated 3.6.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (S.C. and S.T. Act), District Bahraich whereby learned Trial Court forfeited the surety bonds of the appellants and directed for recovery of Rs.50,000/- from each appellants as arrears of land revenue. 4. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are; that the appellants Amerika and Ram Lakhan were stood sureties of accused Ram Khelawan in Sessions Trial No.229 of 2006, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)V of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Khairighat, District Bahraich. The accused Ram Khelawan had gone Punjab in search of livelihood and could not come back on the date fixed to participate in the trial, consequently Non Bailable Warrants and process under Section 82-83 Cr.P.C. were initiated. Later on when accused Ram Khelawan did not turn up, notices were issued to appellants and appellants were indulged in search of accused Ram Khelawan and they could not participate in the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. before the Trial Court. The learned Trial Court forfeited the surety bonds of the appellants and issued recovery warrant (citation) to the District Magistrate, Bahraich to recover the amount of bonds as arrears of land revenue. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that on 25.5.2017 the appellants have submitted an application before the Trial Court for condoning the amount and recall of recovery process with the assertion that accused Ram Khelawan has surrendered in the Court and now he is inside the jail. It is further submitted that appellants are illiterate, rustic villagers and after receiving the notice from the Trial Court they indulged in search of accused Ram Khelawan and did not appear in the Trial Court. It is further submitted that accused Ram Khelawan has been arrested/surrendered and is inside the jail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellants. 7. It is further submitted that accused Ram Khelawan has been arrested/surrendered and is inside the jail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellants. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it appears that appellants failed to participate in the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. and they never turned up in the Trial Court and even after receiving the notice of the Trial Court they instead of appearing before the Trial Court indulged in search of accused Ram Khelawan. Consequently order dated 1.4.2017 was passed for recovery of the amount of bonds as arrears of land revenue. On 3.4.2017 the police has arrested accused Ram Khelawan and produced him before the learned Trial Court and the learned Trial Court sent the accused Ram Khelawan in jail. In the order dated 3.4.2017 passed by learned Trial Court in Sessions Trial No.229 of 2006 (State vs. Pradeep and others), Police Station Khairighat, District Bahraich the Trial Court has noted that accused Ram Khelawan was arrested/surrendered and sent to jail. Thus it is clear that accused Ram Khelawan has already been arrested and is behind the bar. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that appellant/sureties have violated the process of the Court and they did not choose to participate in proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. The error committed by the appellants/sureties cannot be ignored, however, looking to the fact that appellants are illiterate, rustic villagers and are not aware with the process of the Court, in my opinion, ends of justice would be served in reducing the amount of penalty imposed by the learned Trial Court. 9. In view of the above discussions, the amount of bonds in form of penalty imposed by the learned Trial Court in Criminal Misc. Case No.22/11/2017, under Section 446 Cr.P.C. is reduced from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. Both the appellants shall pay Rs.10,000/- separately within a period of one month from the date of order failing which said amount shall be recovered by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law. The order of learned Trial Judge dated 3.6.2017 is modified to the above extent. 10. A copy of this order be notified to the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bahraich for compliance and a report regarding compliance be submitted thereafter. 11. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.