ROSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned DAG for the State of Haryana/respondent.

(2.) THE appellant Roshan Lal is aggrieved by order dated 23.5.1987 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, imposing a penalty of Rs. 3,000/- for his failure to produce the accused Kashmiri Lal in a criminal case, in which the appellant stood surety for the accused. When the accused failed to appear before the Court, the bail bonds were forfeited and the appellant was served with a notice to show cause why the surety bond be not forfeited and the amount of surety be not realised from him, as the amount of penalty. In the opinion of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the appellant failed to show any satisfactory cause against the forfeiture of the amount. Consequently, the penalty of the entire amount of the bond i.e. Rs. 3,000/- was imposed upon the appellant.

(3.) LEARNED AAG for the State of Haryana has referred to ground No. 2 of the grounds of appeal to say that even according to the appellant's contention, he has spent a sum of Rs. 4,000/- in making efforts to trace out the accused that belies the claim of the appellant that he is financially not sound.