These appeals are instituted under Section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for impugning the order dated 16.10.2014 of the Sessions Court, Kollam in M.C No.9 of 2014 in S.C No.2024 of 2011 and in M.C No.6 of 2014 in S.C No.933 of 2011 respectively. The appellants were the sureties of accused 1 and 2 in the crime which led to the institution of the aforementioned Sessions Cases concerned. 2. The appellants had appeared before the court below as directed by that court, as they were unable to produce the accused who had gone abroad. They had pleaded for leniency and reduction of the penalty. The court below as per the impugned orders has directed to pay the penalty amount of `10,000/- for the entire bail amount concerned which comes to `10,000/- each. The above said orders in M.C No.9 of 2014 and M.C No.6 of 2014 in these two respective appeals reads as follows:
“The Counter petitioners are present. They are unable to produce the accused who has gone abroad. They pleaded for leniency in the matter of penalty. The bond is forfeited. The counter petitioners are directed to pay a penalty of Rs.10,000/- each. Rest remitted. In default the amount shall be realised by resorting to issuance of Distress warrant and thereafter if it still remains unrealised, they shall undergo imprisonment in Civil prison for one month each.”
“Both the Counter petitioners are present. The CPs are questioned and they submit that they are unable to produce the accused. Pleads for leniency in the matter of penalty. The accused has absconded and gone abroad. There is no reason for reducing the bond amount which is relatively low. Hence the Cps are directed to pay penalty of Rs.10,000/- each failing which Distress warrant shall be issued to realise the same. In default if the amount having not realised by recording to steps of Revenue Recovery the Cps shall each undergo simple imprisonment in civil prison for one month each.”
3. Heard Sri. V.S.Salim, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants in these cases and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants in these appeals are ladies who are coolie workers and have very meagre and limited income and that it is quite onerous for them to pay the impugned penalty amount of `10,000/- and accordingly prayed for waiver of the penalty amount taking a lenient view. However, the prayer to waive the entire penalty amount cannot be countenanced.
5. Faced with this situation, the learned counsel for the appellants would submit that Section 446(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the court to remit any portion of the penalty and enforce payment in part only and accordingly prays that the penalty amount may be suitably reduced in the interest of justice taking into consideration of the fact that the appellants who are ladies and coolie workers have only very meagre and limited income.
In the facts and circumstances of these cases and in the interest of justice it is ordered that the penalty amount in these respective appeals will stand reduced to `5,000/- each. The appellants in Crl.Appeal No.1217 of 2014 shall pay the penalty amount of `10,000/- before the court below on or before 31.12.2014. The appellants in Crl.Appeal No.1218 of 2014 shall also pay the penalty amount of `5,000/- before the court below concerned on or before 31.12.2014. In case the appellants do not pay the aforementioned penalty amount within the stipulated time limit as stated above, then it is open to the court below concerned concerned to realise the said penalty amount by resorting to issuance of distress warrant.
The Crl. Appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
Vdv //True Copy// P.A to Judge