IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2009 / 11TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3948 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.429/1998 of SESSIONS COURT, TRIVANDRUM MC.76/1998 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONER. --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MARY CELINE, THYVILAKAM PURAYIDOM, VETTUKAD, KADAKAMPILLI VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ANTHONIYA MABIL, KUZHIVILAKAM PURAYIDOM, KOCHUVELI,KADAKAMPILLI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P.NO.3948 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated 1st January 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioners are sureties to the accused in C.C.No.136/1996 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. They executed a bond undertaking to produce the accused as and when called for and in default to pay a penalty of Rs.15,000/- and got the accused released on bail. On the failure of the accused to appear petitioners were directed to produce the accused and when petitioners failed to produce the accused, bail bond was forfeited and proceedings initiated under Section 446 of Cr.P.C by registering M.C.76/1998. Show cause notice was issued to petitioners why penalty shall not be imposed. Though petitioners appeared and offered explanation finding that their explanation is not satisfactory, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed them to pay a penalty of Rs.10,000/- each. They challenged that order before before Sessions court, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.A.429/1998. Learned Crl.R.P.3948/08 2 Sessions Judge confirmed that order and dismissed the appeal finding that they had undertaken to pay a penalty of Rs.15,000/- each and learned Magistrate granted a remission of Rs.5,000/- each and it is reasonable. That order is challenged in the revision. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that petitioners are poor fish venders and they were unaware of the proceedings and the accused had subsequently appeared and was released on probation and in such circumstances the penalty may be reduced. 4. On going through the orders of the courts below it is clear that learned Chief Magistrate has complied with all the formalities provided under Section 446 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Bail bond was forfeited, after petitioners failed to produce the accused as undertaken by them, in spite of notice served on them. Show cause notice was issued and the explanations offered were found unsatisfactory. On going through the orders it cannot be said that the penalty imposed by the learned Crl.R.P.3948/08 3 Magistrate as confirmed by the Sessions Judge was unjustified. Still considering the financial conditions of the petitioners and other relevant circumstances in the interest of justice, the penalty is reduced to Rs.3,500/- each. Criminal Revision petition is allowed in part. The penalty imposed against the petitioners are reduced to Rs.3,500/- each. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.