BHABHOOTI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals U/s 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, have been filed by the appellants in Cr Case Nos. 382/2001 and 370/2001, against orders dtd. 4/9/2001 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Karauli. Since the appellants and facts giving rise to these appeals are same and s identical, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Briefly stated, relevant facts giving rise to these appeals are that the appellants stood sureties for accused Banno in two Sessions Case Nos. 62/2000 arising out of FIR No. 41/2000 PS Mandrail (Karauli) and 66/2000 10 arising out of FIR No. 25/2000 PS Karanpur (Karauli), to produce him on each every date of hearing in those cases but the said accused Banno remained absent in the Court of Sessions Judge, Karauli on 12/6/2001, so his bail bonds were forfeited and proceedings U/s 446 CrPC were initiated separately in both the cases. After receipt of the notice in those proceedings, the appellants tried to trace out accused Banno and found that he had been killed in an encounter with the police on 20/6/2001 and he could not appear before the aforesaid Court on 12/6/2001 owing to his having fallen ill because of fever. They submitted their reply to the above effect on 14/8/2001. But, the learned court below did not accept their explanation submitted in their reply and in spite of there being a report of the police on the notice to accused Banno, dtd. 19/7/2001 that he had been killed in police encounter, entire amount of sureties submitted by the appellants was forfeited and recovery proceedings were initiated. Aggrieved by the said orders, they have filed these two appeals.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, and have also perused relevant record.