AKURA NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Appeal, the appellant calls in question the order passed on 18.12.2006 by the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Khurda in S.T. Case No. 94/535 of 2004, wherein the learned Court below forfeited the bail bond filed by him and ordered for realisation of the bail amount from him.

(2.) The appellant stood as surety for the accused persons in S.T. Case No. 94/535 of 2004 for bail bond of Rs. 10,0007- each. After completion of trial, the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda, as per his judgment dated 9.11.2006 convicted the four accused persons. On their application, learned Court below allowed them to remain on bail by resorting to the provision under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Code" for brevity) and to obtain an order of bail from the High Court within thirty days. Accordingly, on 9.11.2006, the appellant stood as surety for the convicts for bail amount of Rs. 10,000/- each with an undertaking to produce the accused persons at the end of the period. The convicts preferred Appeal before this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 521 of 2006 and this Court took up the matter on 13.12.2006. This Court admitted the Appeal, called for the L.C.R. and in Misc. Case No. 1116 of 2006 directed to release of the convict-appellants. In the meantime, period of thirty days as stipulated by the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Khurda had expired. On 8.12.2006 the convicts were absent. An application under Section 317 of the Code was filed alongwith one application for extending time. Rejecting both petitions, the trial Court issued Warrant against the convicts and also noticed the present appellant to show cause why the entire bail amount of Rs. 40,000/- shall not be realized from him. The case was then posted to 19.12.2006.

(3.) While the matter stood thus, after obtaining the certified copies of the orders passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 521 of 2006, the convicts appeared before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 18.12.2006 and prayed to be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper. On the same date, the appellant filed a written show cause in reply to the notice issued to him. Main cause snown by the appellant was that he had instructed the convict-accused persons to appear before the Court below but the convicts could not obtain the certified copies of the order of the appellate Court in time and prayed for adjournment before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. It is also pleaded by the appellant that the convicts had already surrendered before the trial Court at his behest and hence, he had already discharged his duties. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge considered the cause shown by him as not satisfactory and hence, he ordered for initiating a separate Misc. Case against the delinquent for realisation of the bail amount from him. Such portion of the order dated 18.12.2006 is challenged in this appeal.