IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 CRL.A.No. 1515 of 2009() --------------------------------- CRL.MC. 7/06 IN SC. NO./15/06 OF VITH ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM. ................. APPELLANT(S): (COUNTER PETITIONERS IN MC. 7/06 IN SC. 15/06 OF THE VITH ------------------------ ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM. 1. SYAMALA, W/O.MOHANAN, AGED 39, VALIYAPARAMBIL, MAKKANAYI, CHITTATUKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 2. ALLI, W/O.LATE THANKAPPAN, AGED 60, KAMBIVELIKKAKATHU, THANNIPPADAM, CHITTATTUKARA, PARAVUR TALUK. BY ADV. MR.S.SHYAM RESPONDENT(S): (COMPLAINANT IN MC. 7/06 IN SC.15/06 OF THE VITH ------------------------ ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl. Appeal NO. 1515 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of July, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the order of the 6th Addl. Sessions Judge, Ernakulam in Crl.M.C.7/06 in S.C.15/06. One Thankappan and Syamala stood as sureties for the first accused in the sessions case. The accused did not enter appearance and so notice was issued to the sureties to produce him or to show cause. They did not respond to the notice. The accused was also not produced. Therefore the Court below forfeited the bond and levied a penalty of Rs.50,000/- each on the two sureties. During the pendency it is seen that this Thankappan died and his legal representative is the 2nd petitioner. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that it is true that they did not respond to the notice but it was not deliberate. Secondly the accused was in police custody in connection with another case and therefore it was not possible for them to produce the accused. Both these explanations are proper and acceptable but at the same time Crl. Appeal NO. 1515 OF 2009 -:2:- the court has to keep the system in tact and the seriousness of execution of a bond should be known to the party as well. Therefore it may not be possible for me to exonerate them totally from the liability but a maximum leniency can be shown and the matter can be disposed of. Therefore I feel this is a fit case to reduce the penalty for the reasons, (1) sureties did not help the accused to evade presence before Court and secondly that they are under poor financial circumstances. I impose a penalty of Rs.3,000/- each by reducing it from Rs.50,000/-. Therefore the Crl.Appeal is disposed as follows: The appeal is partly allowed and the amount of penalty is reduced from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.3,000/- and in case of default the first appellant has to undergo imprisonment in civil jail for a period of 15 days. If the amount is not paid or or before 30.10.2009, the lower Court shall execute the order and till that time no coercive steps be taken. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-