THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1795 of 2010 DATED: 05-10-2010 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner- A2 questioning the order, dated 11-08-2010, in Crl.M.P.No.2368 of 2010 in C.C.No.283 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court-cum-XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, whereby the application filed by the petitioner to recall the non-bailable warrant issued against him was refused. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.283 of 2007 for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. P.Ws.2 and 3 were examined in the year 2007 and thereafter, as the petitioner failed to appear before the Court, the Court below issued non- bailabe warrant against him on 22-01-2008 and therefore he filed Crl.M.P.No.2368 of 2010 in the month of 2008 to recall the said warrant and the Court below, as stated supra, refused to recall the said warrant. The same is questioned in this revision. 3. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from joint pain and back pain and was taking treatment in the hospital from 08-05-2008 to 30-07-2010 and therefore he could not appear before the Court below during these two years. 5. I do not accept the said submission. As per the medical certificate, no doubt, he was undergoing treatment, but he was never hospitalized. The said treatment was not taken as an inpatient. When he could go to the hospital for the purpose of treatment, I do not understand his attitude in not attending the Court below when non-bailable warrant is pending against him right from January, 2008. Apparently, the conduct of the petitioner is blameworthy, and no indulgence can be shown. However, as it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner’s daughter got engaged and if the petitioner is in jail and the said fact is known to the family members of the bridegroom, there is every possibility of the engagement getting cancelled. Taking that circumstance alone into consideration, this Court is inclined to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the Court below and file an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C., to recall the said warrant pending against him from January, 2008. On such appearance and application, as stated supra, being filed, the Court below may consider the same and recall the warrant, however imposing a condition that the petitioner shall furnish a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- ( rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each. Further, if the petitioner fails to appear before the Court below on any date of adjournment, the Court is at liberty to issue non-bailable warrant against him and remand to the judicial custody. 6. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 05th October, 2010. Tsy