1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1323 of 2008) Date of Decision: 16.7.2009 *** Harnek Singh .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab. .. Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. D.K. Kaushal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner stood surety for one Dalip Kumar, an accused in case FIR No. 105 dated 5.7.2003, under Sections 420, 506 IPC, Police Station City, Kotkapura, who subsequently did not appear before the Court and has been declared as proclaimed offender. The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 446 Cr.P.C. but having failed to produce the accused despite availing time for the same, the learned Magistrate imposed the penalty of Rs.50,000/- equivalent to the amount of surety bond and asked for recovery of the same by initiating proceedings. In an appeal preferred by the surety-petitioner, the learned Sessions Judge, though reduced the amount of fine to Rs.25000/-, but imposed a rider that the surety has to produce the accused on or before 15.2.2008, otherwise his appeal shall be deemed to be dismissed. The petitioner, however, failed to produce the accused before the Court below Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that the condition/ rider, as imposed, be waived off. Heard. There is breach of condition of surety bond on the part of the petitioner. But there is nothing on record which is suggestive of the fact that the petitioner had any remote scent that the accused is preparing to escape from the trial or he had connived with the accused jumping out the 2 bail. Keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner, the instant revision petition is disposed of with the modification in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge that the condition imposed upon the petitioner shall be waived off and the penalty of Rs.25,000/- as reduced by the appellate Court below be deposited by him within a period of two months. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to deposit the fine amount, the instant revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, without there being any effect on the recovery proceedings of the original amount of Rs.5,0000/- initiated against the petitioner. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE July 16,2009 Jiten