MUNEER AHMED Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by Muneer Ahmed 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 amounting to the tune of RI. 30,000.

(2.) The material facts are as under. The Video Case the Recorder and T.V. were seized by the police and were produced before the Court below in CC. 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 a5 ordered by it. Thereafter the Court issued a notice to the surety- petitioner 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 petitioner 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 surety-petitioner being aggrieved by this order hall come up with the present revision petition.

(3.) The petitioners Counsel submitted that before forfeiting the indemnity bond, no notice had been given to the surety.