IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931 CRL.A.No. 1570 of 2009 -------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26/05/2008 IN MC.18/2007 IN SC.322/2006 of SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD .......................................... APPELLANT(S)/COUNTER PETITIONER/SURETY: --------------------------------------------------------------------- K. ABDULLA, S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, MAFAZA MANZIL, ANGADIMOGAR P.O., KASARGOD. BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl. Appeal NO. 1570 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred by the first counter petitioner against the order in M.C.18/07 who along with the 2nd counter petitioner in the M.C. had stood as surety for the first accused in S.C.322/06. As the accused did not enter appearance, sureties were directed to produce him. They failed to produce and therefore the bond was forfeited and they were directed to pay a penalty of Rs.20,000/- each. It is against that decision the first counter petitioner in the M.C. has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the Prosecutor. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there was no intentional or deliberate conduct on the part of the sureties to help the accused to evade his presence before Court. It is also contended that they are under poor financial circumstances and therefore leniency may be shown. After hearing both the sides I feel some leniency can be shown whereby reducing the penalty Crl. Appeal NO. 1570 OF 2009 -:2:- amount with respect to the first counter petitioner/appellant from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. 3. In the result, Crl.Appeal is partly allowed and the appellant herein is directed to pay a penalty of Rs.10,000/- instead of Rs.20,000/- on or before 31.10.2009 and in case of default to undergo imprisonment in civil prison for two months. The Crl.Appeal is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-