IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 29TH APRIL 2011 / 9TH VAISAKHA 1933 CRL.A.No. 706 of 2011() ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN MC 157/09 IN SC.179/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE .................... APPELLANTS/SURETIES :- ------------------------------------ 1. SUNDARI, W/O.KANTHAPPA SHETTY, SREENILAYA HOUSE, PANJA, MANGALPADY, KASARAGODE. 2. ANANDA, S/O.KALLALA, ADHA HOUSE, BANDIYODU, MANGALPADY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S)/STATE :- ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.J.MOHAMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Crl.Appeal No.706 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 29th day of April 2011 J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed by the sureties of accused in S.C.No.179 of 2007 of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-III, Kasaragode under Sec.449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”) against the order dated 20-11-2009 in M.C.No.157 of 2009 imposing penalty of Rs.10,000/- each for failure to comply with the conditions of bail bond executed by them. On the failure of accused to appear before learned Additional Judge, bail bond was cancelled and notice was issued to the petitioners to produce the accused on 24.9.2009. The case was posted on 20.11.2009. That day, the impugned order was passed. 2. It is contended by learned counsel that though Crl.Appeal No.706 of 2011 -: 2 :- subsequent to the impugned order, petitioners have produced the accused before learned Additional Sessions Judge on 31.12.2009 and he was released on bail. It is also submitted that the case ultimately ended in acquittal of the accused. In the circumstance it is prayed that the order imposing penalty may be set aside or leniency may be shown to petitioners. Learned counsel submitted that petitioners are agriculturists and that they are unable to raise Rs.10,000/- each as ordered by the learned Additional Judge. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 3. It is seen from Annexure-I, copy of proceeding of learned Additional Judge in S.C.No.179 of 2007 that on 31.12.2009 the accused was produced by the sureties (appellants) and he was released on bail. Though subsequent to the impugned order, appellants did produce the accused before learned Sessions Judge. I am inclined to think that having regard to the circumstances stated by learned counsel, leniency can be shown to the appellants. I Crl.Appeal No.706 of 2011 -: 3 :- am satisfied that penalty of Rs.2,000/- each is sufficient. Resultantly this Criminal Appeal is allowed in part to the extent that penalty imposed on the appellants as per order dated 20.11.2009 in M.C.No.157 of 2009 of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-III, Kasaragode is modified as Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) each. Appellants shall deposit the said amount in the trial court within one month from this day failing which shall undergo detention in the civil prison for two weeks each. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. Jvt