RAM LAUT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MAITHLI Sharan, J. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Addl. Government Advocate this appeal is being disposed of finally.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that the appellant stood surety for accused Sabha Jeet Singh in S. T. No. 18/93 under Sections 395, 397 and 412, I. P. C. , Police Station Kotwali, Faizabad and that he had furnished surety bond on 1-5-93 for a sum of Rs. seven thousand in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad. Later on the case was committed to the Court of Sessions in the year 1993 with the aforesaid sessions trial No. 18/93. In the Court of Sessions the accused appeared but he absented on 18-9-95 and 10-10-95 and therefore non-bailable warrant of his arrest and show-cause notices to the sureties were issued on 16- 11-95. Bail bonds were also forfeited. The appellant alongwith another surety appeared before the court; the court allowed time to search the accused who was declared absconder. Separate case was registered against the sureties under Section 446, Cr. P. C. and 22-12-95 was fixed. However, on 22-12-95 the appellant could not trace accused and hence on 22-1-96 the impugned order was passed by the trial Court. The appellant was ordered to deposit Rs. 7,000, the amount mentioned in the surety bond, by 5- 3-96. Aggrieved by that order the appellant has filed this appeal. It is also curious to note at this juncture that the Police filed a report to the effect that the said accused Sabha Jit Singh had been murdered and then the trial Court, after going through the said police report, ordered that the case had abated against the said accused.

(3.) LET a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the appellant by tomorrow on payment of usual charges. Appeal partly allowed .