ANIL NARANG Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Ms. Seema Sirohi learned Counsel for the appellants and A.G.A. and perused the record.

(2.) THIS is an appeal under section 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Code') against the proceedings drawn and concluded as per the provisions of section 446 of the Code. One of the accused Ajay Sethi in the Special Sessions Trial 4 -A of 1990 was released on bail and Joginder Singh Narang stood surety for him. Later on, accused was declared absconder and bail bonds were forfeited. When the notice was sent to the said surety it was reported that he had died. An enquiry on being made it was disclosed that the two sons of the surety were in possession of the estate left behind by the deceased. The description of the property, house No. 45/4 Khurbura Mohalla, Dehradun was also disclosed and Anil Narang and Yashpal Narang -the two sons of the deceased surety being in possession of the estate of the deceased were sent show cause notice calling upon them to discharge the liability of the deceased surety under the bond. They did not put in appearance despite service of the notice whereby the learned Special Judge, Dehradun by the impugned order dated 8.1.2002 held these two sons liable to discharge the liability and to pay the amount of the surety bond i.e. Rs.7 ,000/ - and recovery warrant were directed to be issued against both of them. Record reveal that both these legal heirs of the deceased surety deposited the amount of penalty surety bond to the tune of Rs. 7,000/ - on 5.3.2002 vide receipt Annexure -3 of the instant appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants submitted that the surety Joginder Singh Narang had in fact. died in the year 1996 and till then his surety bonds were not forfeited, therefore1 by virtue of sub -section