IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 637 of 2008() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.05.2005 IN MC 28/05 IN SC.5/2005 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. UDAYAN, S/O. GOPI, UDAYA MANDIRAM, THEKKUMMURI, EAST KALLADA VILLAGE. 2. SASIDHARAN, S/O. KANNAN PULLAN, THEKKEMURI, KIZHAKKE KALLADA. 3. RADHA, S/O. GOPI, UDAYA MANDIRAM, THEKKUMMURI, EAST KALLADA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENTS: ----------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO. 58 OF 2003 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION.) BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== CRL.M.C. No.637 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008. O R D E R The petitioners are the accused and two of his sureties in S.C. No. 5/2005 before the Additional Sessions Court, Adhoc-I, Kollam. It was a case involving offences punishable under Sections 55(a) and 55(i) of the Abkari Act. Consequent on the first petitioner remaining absent, the learned Additional Sessions Judge after forfeiting the bond issued non-bailable warrants of arrest against the 1st petitioner and notice to petitioners 2 and 3 by initiating proceedings against them as M.C. No. 28/2005. To the show cause notice, petitioners 2 and 3 had no valid explanation to be offered. Thereupon, the learned Sessions Judge imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000/- out of the bond amount of Rs.20,000/- It was also ordered that in case of default in payment of the penalty and if the amounts were found irrecoverable in spite of the prescribed process of law, the sureties shall be sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months in a civil prison. Distress warrant was directed to be issued to the sureties. CRL. M.C. NO. 637/2008 : 2: 2. The above order is an order passed by the trial court under Section 446 Cr.P.C and the remedy of the petitioner is not to approach this Court by filing a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Their remedy is to file an appeal under Section 449 Cr.P.C. In case the petitioners file an appeal before the appropriate court under Section 449 Cr.P.C within two weeks from today, I am sure that the appellate court shall treat the delay in filing the appeal with leniency. This Crl.M.C is dismissed with the above observation. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL. M.C. NO. 637/2008 : 3: