The petitioner was the surety for the accused in S.C. 1575/2007 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Neyyattinkara. On the failure of the accused to appear before Court, the appellant was issued notice to show cause why the bond amount should not be forfeited. He failed to respond to the notice and the Court, by the impugned Order, directed him to pay the bond amount of Rs.25,000/- as penalty. The grounds urged in the appeal are that the petitioner was not given opportunity to produce the accused before the lower Court and the Order to realise the entire bond amount is illegal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
3. It is not at all the law that the surety should be given an opportunity to produce the accused. The moment Crl.A. No. 590/2014 -2-
the accused fails to appear before Court, the Court will record the forfeiture of the bond amount if it is so satisfied. So, that ground is not available for the petitioner.
4. The second ground is that the direction to realise the entire bond amount as penalty is illegal. The accused was alleged to have committed the offence under the Abkari Act. The bond amount is only Rs.25,000/-. In the absence of any explanation on the part of the petitioner, the lower Court was only justified in ordering realisation of the entire bond amount. He could not show the existence of any mitigating circumstance and so, I am satisfied that there is nothing illegal or irregular or improper in the order passed by the lower court.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj