Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ram Lal Sharma & Another vs State Of H.P on 18 May, 2017
Author: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr. Appeal No. 150 of 2016.
Decided on: 18th May, 2017 .
Ram Lal Sharma & Another .........Appellants.
Versus State of H.P. .......Respondent. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No.
For the appellants : Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Varun Chandel, Addl. A.G. Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral).
Order dated 18.6.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan, in the proceedings under Section 446 Cr. P.C., is under challenge in the present appeal. The impugned order reads as follows:-
" Surety/respondent Ram Lal not present nor process issued as necessary list of property not filed. However, at this stage, list of property filed. Let appropriate warrant of attachment to realize the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2017 23:59:48 :::HCHP 2
forfeited amount of Rs.50,000/- be issued to the concerned District Collector and report be called for 1.8.2015."
.
2. As a matter of fact, as per the record, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. were ordered to be initiated against both appellants. The proceedings so initiated stand terminated on forfeiture of the amount of bond money i.e. `50,000/-
in favour of the State of Himachal Pradesh, vide order passed on 5.8.2014. This aspect of the matter is substantiated from the warrant for recovery of the amount in question issued against both of them on 30th June 2012 at page 45 and 46 of the paper book i.e. Annexure R-1 (Colly. to the reply.).
3. Since the impugned order has been passed on their failure to appear and deposit of amount of penalty so imposed upon each of them, therefore, the impugned order qua attachment of their property as per the list supplied has been passed on 18.6.2015 against them. Order dated 5.8.2014 vide ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2017 23:59:48 :::HCHP 3 which penalty seems to be imposed upon the appellants has not been placed on record of this appeal. The same also not seems to be challenged .
and as the impugned order has been passed behind their back, therefore, instead of filing the present appeal in this Court, they should have approached learned trial Court for seeking appropriate relief.
When confronted with such legal situation, learned counsel representing the appellants seeks permission to withdraw this appeal at this stage with liberty reserved to seek remedy available to them, in accordance with law. Leave and liberty as sought is granted. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Copy Dasti.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary)
May 18, 2017 (ps) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2017 23:59:48 :::HCHP