IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 808 of 2011() ------------------------ CC.249/2010 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VAIKOM .................... (CRIME NO.90/2010 OF VAIKOM POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. CHANDRAN,S/O. PAPPY, KANNANKKERY HOUSE, THRIKKAKARA KARA , MULAMTHURUTHY VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK. 2. PAPPI, S/O. MAKARIRAM, KARIVELI HOUSE, EROORKARA, NADAMA VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.MATHAI EAPPEN VETTATH, SMT.A.R.USHA. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- *1. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VAIKOM.(DELETED) * R1 IS DELETED FROM THE ARRAY OF PARTIES AS PER ORDER DATED 15/03/2011 IN CRL.M.C.808/11. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.808 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011 O R D E R First respondent is not a necessary party and hence is deleted from the array of parties. Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the cause title. 2. Petitioners are sureties of the accused in C.C. No.249 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vaikom involving offence punishable under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Since the accused did not comply with the terms and conditions of the bond executed by petitioners, learned Magistrate issued notice to them under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”) directing them to show cause why they shall not be directed to pay penalty consequent to forfeiture of the bond. Petitioners have approached this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to discharge petitioners from suretyship. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Public CRL.M.C. No.808 of 2011 -: 2 :- Prosecutor. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners made a fervent plea to discharge petitioners from suretyship. It is contended that accused who was released on bail got drowned in River Ganga, petitioners are Coolies and are unable to pay the penalty as may be ordered by the learned Magistrate. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners have to undergo the procedure provided under the Code in the matter. 4. Learned Magistrate has issued notice under Sec.446 of the Code requiring petitioners to show cause. It is open to the petitioners to show cause against imposition of penalty. If the accused who was released on bail is proved to have died before the bail bond was forfeited learned Magistrate has to consider whether petitioners could be saddled with any liability. If petitioners have any other justifiable ground to urge before the learned Magistrate it is open to them to do so and if any adverse order is passed, the Code provides for an appeal under Sec.449. Moreover, request to discharge petitioners from suretyship cannot be allowed by this Court. CRL.M.C. No.808 of 2011 -: 3 :- Resultantly, leaving petitioners to appropriate remedy before the learned Magistrate as provided under law this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is closed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv