(1.) The applicants, Mithai Lal and Raheem, are said to have stood sureties for one Devendra Singh alias Pooran Singh. It appears that subsequently the bail of Devendra Singh alias Pooran Singh was cancelled by this Court. Consequently, the learned C.J.M., Jaunpur, had issued warrant of arrest to the accused Devendra Singh alias Pooran Singh. As Devendra Singh alias Pooran Singh was not available upon the address which was available in the court, the amount of the bail bonds and personal bond was forfeited and notice was issued to the sureties. The applicants did appear in response to the notice before the learned C.J.M. and prayed for time to produce the accused. On 30/10/1991 the applicants not only failed to produce the accused but also did not appear before the learned C.J.M. Consequently, the learned C.I., Jaunpur, passed an order for realisation of Rs. 6,000.00 each from the applicants by way of penalty.
(2.) The applicants went in appeal and their appeal was dismissed on 4/3/1992. In the appeal one of the pleas raised by the applicants was that the accused, Devendra Singh alias Pooran Singh, had died as such they were not in a position to produce him before the learned Magistrate. Learned Sessions Judge did not consider this plea on the ground that no such plea was raised by the applicants before the C.J.M., Jaunpur, although a Photostat copy of a news item, published in the newspaper Dainik Jagran, was produced before the learned Sessions Judge.
(3.) On perusal of the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge it is not clear as to what was the, date on which the accused was said to have died. It may be that the accused died sometimes after 30/10/1991 and as such the applicants were not in a position to raise this plea before the learned Magistrate. However, the matter requires an enquiry by the learned C.I.M., Jaunpur, for the simple reason that in case the accused is in fact dead then the applicants cannot be saddled with the responsibility of producing him in the Court.