IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 27TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 CRL.A.No. 2585 of 2008() ------------------------ SC.653/2006 of 1ST ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/2ND COUNTER PETITIONER IN MC 3/08 --------------------------------------------------------- SCARIA, S/O.PHILIP, AGED 72 YEARS, PALLIKUNNEL HOUSE, AYARKUNNA, VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.SABU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IDUKKI POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.A.No. 2585 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The appellant was a surety for an accused, who faced a prosecution before the Sessions Court under the provisions of the Kerala Abkari Act. The accused did not appear before the learned Judge on 22.2.2008 and 10.3.2008. Thereupon a warrant of arrest was issued against the accused. Notice was ordered to the sureties and they were directed to appear on 17.4.2008. They appeared on 17.4.2008 and the impugned order under Section 446 Cr.P.C. was passed on 21.4.2008. The appellant ensured that the accused appeared before the learned Judge immediately thereafter and he appeared before Court on 4.7.2008. The judgment of acquittal was passed on 8.7.2008. 2. In the above facts scenario the learned counsel for the appellant in this appeal under Section 449 Cr.P.C. only prays that leniency may be shown to the appellant and the penalty amount may be reduced. Crl.A.No. 2585 of 2008 2 3. The offence alleged against the accused was a serious one. A sessions case had been registered. The appellant had offered to stand surety for him. But he could not make the accused available for a period of about 4 ½ months. However, taking note of the fact that the accused has already entered appearance and has already been acquitted by the court, I am persuaded to agree that leniency can be shown. 4. This Criminal Appeal is allowed in part. The impugned order is modified and in supersession of the directions in the impugned order, the appellant herein is directed to pay penalty of Rs.3,000/- If the recovery of the amount is found to be impracticable, the appellant shall undergo imprisonment in civil prison for a period of one month. (R. BASANT) Judge tm