RAM HARSH TIWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 449 Cr. P.C. is directed against the order dated 25.2.1995 and 22.5.1995 passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Sultanpur in Misc. Case No. 13 of 1994, State v. Daya Shanker and Others u/sec. 465 Cr. .C. By the first mentioned order, the learned Sessions Judge bad directed realisation of a sum of Rs. 11,000/- from the appellant and by the second order, the learned Sessions Judge bas refused to recall the said order.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate state that this appeal may be disposed of finally at this stage as the matter involved is rather trivial. This appears to be proper.

(3.) It appears that the appellant stood surety for the accused Lallo Basudev. Lallo absented on one of the dates fixed and, accordingly, the learned Sessions Judge cancelled the bail and forfeited the surety bonds and issued notice to the appellant to show cause why the amount mentioned in the order be not realised from him. In the meanwhile, the accused was produced before the Court and was sent to jail. He has subsequently been released on fresh bail bonds. The appellant moved the learned Sessions Judge for recalling the order of realisation but this prayer bas been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 25.2.1995, inter alia, on the ground that the order is appealable.