GOURANGA CHANDRA KAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two connected revisions filed by a person who had stood surety for eight accused persons on executing a bail bond before the police during investigation of a criminal case.

(2.) OUT of the eight accused persons who were released on bail by the police, seven accused persons were charge -sheeted on 6 -5 -1970 under Sections 147, 447 and 323, Indian Penal Code. The learned Sub -divisional Magistrate issued notice to the Petitioner to produce the accused persons on 3 -7 -1970. On that date the accused persons were found absent and the Petitioner was again noticed to produce the accused persons on 4 -8 -1970. As the accused persons were not produced on 4 -8 -1970 the bail bond executed by the Petitioner was forfeited and a proceeding under Section 514, Code of Criminal Procedure was started. On 22 -7 -1971 a penalty of Rs. 4,000/ - was levied against the Petitioner. On appeal, the learned Addl. District Magistrate (judicial) found that five accused persons had already appeared and reduced the penalty to a sum of Rs. 1,500/ -. On 9 -2 -1972 the Petitioner produced the other two accused persons and prayed for exemption from payment of penalty, but his prayer was rejected on 3 -9 -1973. A criminal revision preferred against that order before the learned A.D.M. (1) was dismissed on 10 -9 -1973.

(3.) I may in this connection refer to a decision of Vivian Bose, J (as he then was) in the case of Emperor v. Chintaram, A.I.R. 1936 Nag. 243, wherein such a point had been debated and it was held as follows: