Karnataka High Court
Chinnappa I vs State By Public Prosecutor on 13 June, 2019
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.203 OF 2019
BETWEEN
SRI. CHINNAPPA I,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
1SR FLOOR, 2ND BLOCK, 7TH CROSS,
VISHWAPRIYA LAYOUT, BEGUR,
BANGALORE-560 068. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAM BAI, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY HULIMAVU POLICE STATION,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP)
***
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 449 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.01.2019 AND PASSED BY THE LXXI
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, BANGALORE PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.2072/2015 AND ALSO TO CLOSE THE CRL.MISC.
NO.2072/2015.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING FOR AMISSION, ON THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section 449 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the order dated 14.01.2019 passed in Crl.Misc. No.2072/2015, on the file of the Court of LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
2. The appellant is the surety holder for one Rajendra who was accused of the offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 306 of IPC, pending in S.C. No.1503/2013 on the file of the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. The said accused came to be released on bail on 28.06.2014, on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1 Lakh with one surety for the likesum and on other conditions. The appellant herein stood as surety for the said accused. The accused remained absent before the Trial Court. The learned Sessions Judge forfeited the surety bond and issued FLW to the surety holder. The appellant herein appeared before the Court below and filed an application before the Trial Court under Section 146(3) of Cr.P.C. seeking time to pay reasonable surety bond amount.
3
3. The learned Sessions Judge by an Order dated 14.01.2019 rejected the said application filed under Section 446(3) of Cr.P.C. and issued FLW to recover the bond amount with a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police to execute the warrant returnable by 01.03.2019. Against the aforesaid order passed by the court below, the present appeal has been preferred.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that inspite of best efforts made by the appellant, he could not secure the accused. Appellant is a senior citizen, aged about 62 years and he is a retired person. He further submits that the accused subsequently appeared before the Court below and he was released on bail by the Sessions Court on 08.03.2018. Hence, he submits that the penalty now imposed against the appellant is harsh and a lenient view may be taken.
5. The learned HCGP on the other hand contended that inspite of standing surety for the accused, he has failed to secure his presence and the accused was 4 absent on several occasions. Hence, rightly the bond has been forfeited and submits that there is no ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the court below. Accordingly seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. It is stated that the accused has subsequently appeared before the trial court and he was released on bail by imposing fresh conditions. It is stated that inspite of best efforts made by the appellant, he could not secure the presence of the accused. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, I deem it appropriate to reduce the penalty now proposed to be imposed against the appellant. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The appeal is allowed in part.
The order passed by the court below dated 14.01.2019 in Crl.Misc. No.2072/2015 on the file of the LXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, is hereby modified. The application filed by the appellant herein 5 under Section 446(3) of Cr.PC is partly allowed. FLW issued against the surety is set aside.
The appellant/surety holder shall pay penalty of Rs.15,000/- towards bond amount, which shall be deposited before the court below within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the learned Sessions Judge shall proceed to recover the same in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE Snc