IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 CRL.A.No. 2760 of 2008() ------------------------ (CRL.M.C. 1723/2008 IN S.C.424/2008 OF THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(ADHOC) FAST TRACK COURT-1, THRISSUR) .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------ 1. ALI, S/O.PATTUKARA ALAVI, PALAPPAILY DESOM, VARANTHARAPPILLY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. HAMSA, S/O.VATTOLI ALVAI, PALAPPAILY DESOM, VARANTHARAPPILLY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI C.M. KAMMAPPU. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- CRL.A. No. 2760 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, 2nd February, 2009. JUDGMENT The appellants herein are the sureties of the 8th accused in S.C.No.424/2008 of the Additional Sessions Court, Fast Track 1, Thrissur. As the 8th accused absconded, notice was issued to the appellants and though they were heard, no explanation was offered and accordingly, the trial court imposed penalty at the rate of Rs.25,000/- each and there was a direction to remit the amount on or before 30.10.2008. It is the above order challenged in this appeal. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. The learned counsel submitted that the appellants have made all attempts to procure the presence of the absconding 8th accused but they have failed in their attempt as the 8th accused is in gulf country. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the other accused had already faced the trial and they were accordingly acquitted. Thus it is submitted by the learned counsel that a lenient view may be taken. 4. It is a fact that because of the non cooperation of the 8th Crl.A.No.2760/08 -:2:- accused who was released on bail on the basis of the suretyship of the appellants, the trial court had undertaken a trial against all the accused remaining accused. It is also incumbent upon the court below to undertake one more trial on appearance of the 8th accused. Therefore it cannot be held that the order of the court below is illegal, or incorrect. However, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellants, being the sureties, tried their best for procuring the absconding accused and their attempt resulted in vain because the 8th accused is somewhere in gulf countries. Considering the over all situation, I am of the view that the amount imposed as penalty can be reduced and refixed as Rs.15,000/-(Fifteen thousand only). 5. This Court while admitting the appeal, by order dated 25.11.2008 in Crl.M.A.No.11676/2008, stayed the execution of the impugned order on condition of each of the appellants depositing an amount of Rs.5000/- before the court below within a period of 30 days from the date of the above order. The learned counsel submitted that those amounts had already been deposited. If that be so, towards the compliance of this order, each of the appellants need to further deposit Rs.10,000/-. Thus the appellants are directed to deposit Rs.10,000/- each, within one month from today. The amount already deposited in terms of the stay order can be appropriated towards the final settlement Crl.A.No.2760/08 -:3:- of the amount refixed by this Court. If the amount so deposited, the same shall be treated as compliance of this order and all coercive steps shall be deferred. It is made clear that if the amount so ordered to pay is not paid within the stipulated time, the court below is free to take all coercive steps to realise the amount. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- Crl.A.No.2760/08 -:4:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. No.... Judgment/Order Dated: