BIRENDRA NATH BAKSHI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application against an order of the learned additional Chief Presidency Magistrate forfeiting a bail bond which is said to have been executed by the petitioner. The petitioner himself denied that he had ever executed the bond. The Magistrate had an inquiry made by the police which did not really carry the matter very far. As a result the Magistrate passed an order forfeiting the bond without giving any reasons. In his explanation he says that the petitioner was picked out in a test identification held by the inquiring police officer. The Magistrate's order cannot possibly he supported. Since the petitioner denied the execution of the bond it was obviously necessary that there should be some evidence to prove that he did. The Magistrate took no evidence at all, with the result that he based his order on nothing. The Rule must therefore be made absolute. The Magistrates order is set aside and anything paid in compliance with it will be refunded to the petitioner. S.K. Ghose, J.

(2.) I agree.