KHURSHEED BEGUM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application the petitioners have challenged the order dated 4th July 1991 of Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi thereby imposing a penalty of Rs. 2 lacs on each of them.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners states that the allegation against the petitioners has been that they stood sureties for Khial Asghar and undertook to pay Rs. 2 lacs each to the State in case of default in appearance before the Court. However, the accused absented and non-bailable warrants against the said accused remained un-executed. Bail bonds were forfeited and penalty has been imposed upon the petitioners vide impugned order dated 4th July 1991.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there has been a violation of the mandatory provisions by the learned Trial Court inasmuch as no opportunity has been given to the petitioners to show cause against the imposing of the penalty after the order of forfeiture and impugned order has been passed, imposing the penalty simultaneously while forfeiting the bonds.