1991 P Cr (PLP)

The facts leading to this revision are that Muhammad Aslam was arrested in a case F.I.R. No.54, under section 302/34, P.P.C., of Police Station Nankana Sahib. He was admitted to interim bail in the sum of Rs.25,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ilaqa Magistrate, Shcikhupura, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura. On 29-4-1976 Muhammad Aslam, accused, did not appear before learned Sessions Judge. Instead of forfeiting the bail bond, the learned Additional District Judge directed Ilaqa Magistrate to initiate the proceedings under section 514, Cr.P.C. After holding proceedings under section 514, Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate forfeited the bail bond to the extent of Rs.1,000 from each of the sureties. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the sureties filed an appeal before the learned District Magistrate, Sheikhupura, which was dismissed on 30-11-1977. Hence,, this revision.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the bail was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, therefore, the Magistrate 1st Class could not have forfeited the same. No one has appeared for the State to oppose this petition.

3. I have considered the matter carefully. I feel persuaded to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners. The relevant section of Cr.P.C. may be reproduced conveniently: "Section 514.-- (1) Whenever it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court by which a bond under this Code has been taken, or of the Court of a. Magistrate of the 1st Class. Or when the bond is for appearance before a Court, to the satisfaction of such Court. That such bond has been forfeited, the Court shall record the grounds of such proof, and may call upon any person bound by such bond to pay the penalty thereof, or to show cause why it would not be paid. (2) If sufficient cause is not shown and the penalty is not paid the Court may proceed to recover the same by issuing a warrant for attachment and sale. of the movable property belonging to such person or his estate if he be dead:" The plain reading of the provision of law reproduced above will show that when the bond is for appearance before a particular Court then that Court alone and no other Court can proceed under section

514. Cr.P.C. to forfeit,, the bond. Since m the instant case the bail application was pending before the Additional District Judge and the bond was for appearance before him, therefore, the entire proceedings held by Magistrate under section 514, Cr.P.C. were illegal and without jurisdiction.

4. Pursuant to the above discussion, the revision application is accepted and the impugned orders are set aside. M.B.A./A-1190/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????Revision accepted.