MUNEER AHAMED Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by Muneer Ahamed is against the order dated 6-12-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur, in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 1986 affirming the order dated 20-10-1986 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Chikmagalur, in C.C. No. 21 of 1984 calling upon the petitioner to pay the entire indemnity bond amount to the tune of Rs. 30,000.

(2.) The material facts are as under. The Video Casette Recorder and T.V. were seized by the police and were produced before the Court below in C.C. No. 21 of 1984. The accused in that case filed an application for the return of the property to him. The Magistrate ordered the release of the property subject to the accused furnishing an indemnity bond and furnishing an indemnity bond by a surety to the tune of Rs. 30,000. The present petitioner executed the indemnity bond as per the order dated 30-12-1983. The V.C.R. and the T.V. were released to the accused. Thereafter the Court issued notice to the accused to produce the properties. The accused appeared on 27-8-1986 and prayed time till 1-9-1986. In the meanwhile, the said indemnity bond executed by the present surety-petitioner was forfeited by the Court on the ground that the accused did not produce the properties before the Court as ordered by it. Thereafter the Court issued a notice to the surety dated 8-9-1986 calling upon him to show cause as to why the amount of indemnity bond executed for Rs. 30.000 which had been forfeited should not be recovered from him. The Court below considered the objections raised by the surety and overruled them and ordered that the entire amount of Rs. 30 000 should be recovered and it accordingly issued a warrant to the surety. The petitioner-surety being aggrieved by this order has come up with the present revision petition.

(3.) The petitioner's Counsel submit- the that before forfeiting the indemnity bond, no notice had been given to the surety.