SANGAT RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the order dated 22.2.2011 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandi, imposing penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/ - upon Appellant who stood surety to accused Philipox Livirio for Rs. 1,00,000/ - for releasing him on bail in case arising out to FIR No. 73 of 2008 under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and Substance Act, 1985 ( for short Act) registered at Police Station, Sadar, District Mandi and failed to produce the accused in the Court on 19.4.2010. The learned Court below issued non bailable warrants against the accused, personal and surety bonds furnished by the accused and surety were forfeited to the State of Himachal Pradesh, proceedings under Section 446 Code of Criminal Procedure were also initiated against accused and surety.

(2.) THE Appellant filed reply dated 17.5.2010 stating therein that he stood surety of the accused as his son was in judicial custody in connection with a case under Section 302 IPC. He received Rs. 10,000/ - for this purpose from accused in order to defend his son in the case. The Appellant is a poor man and was not in a position to contest the case of his son and to pay fee of his advocate. He searched the accused but despite his best efforts he could not produce the accused in the trial Court.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the Appellant so also the learned Addl. Advocate General. The learned Counsel for the Appellant has confined his submissions on the point that the Appellant is the victim of the circumstances. He is an old and sick man. The son of the Appellant is facing case under Section 302 IPC. In order to defend the son, the Appellant took Rs. 10,000/ - from the accused and stood surety. The accused is a foreign national, jumped the bail, despite best efforts the Appellant could not produce the accused in the Court. The penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/ - imposed by the Court below is excessive. He has prayed for taking a lenient view. The learned Counsel for the Appellant has relied re K. Sivaswami Servai and another, : AIR 1962 Mad 340 and K. Rafudin Ahmed v. State of Mysore : 1973 Cri. L.J.891 The learned Addl. Advocate General has supported the impugned order.