UDAI RAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against an order of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge, Agra, forfeiting the surety-bonds furnished by the applicants and directing the amount of the bonds to be realised from them by way of penalty.

(2.) THE applicants had stood sureties for one Pancham, who was being prosecuted in a criminal case before the Court of Session. On the dates fixed for the trial of the case Pancham did not turn up and notices were issued to the applicants to produce him before the Court. The applicants took several ad. journments for tracing him out, but ultimately failed to produce him. The learned Sessions Judge, therefore, by his impugned order held that their bonds be forfeited and directed the recovery of the amount from the applicants.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicants has argued that the order of the learned Sessions Judge is unsustainable in law inasmuch as he had given opportunity to the applicants to show cause against the forfeiture of their bonds, but did not provide them an opportunity to show cause as to why the amount be not realised from them by way of penalty. There is some force in this contention.