1999 PLP 1353 (YLR)

4. Hence this Criminal Revision for the reduction of the amount in question.

5. The main thrust of the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners herein should not have been directed to pay more than 25% to 50% of the bail bonds and that therefore, the order of the Sessions Judge/Zilla Qazi, Chitral, was improper being unfair and unjust. He prayed that the bail amount be accordingly reduced to 25% to 50%.

6. I however, do not tend to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners in view of the dictum laid down in the following two judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan:‑‑ (1) PLD 1997 Supreme Court 267 Zeeshan Kazmi v. The State. (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898). S. 514.. Bail Bond, forfeiture of... Once an accused person jumps bail bond the entire surety amount becomes liable to be forfeited in the absence of any mitigating circumstances .... Courts in view of bleak scenario which has emerged, with the passage of time on account of the lack of respect of the rule of law, and because of the unprecedent continuous steep inflationary tendency resulting in the loss of money value should not show any leniency while forfeiting bail bond amount Approach of Courts should be dynamic and progressive- oriented with the desire to discourage the accused persons to jump bail bond. There has been overall deterioration in all spheres of life. The crime rate has increased manifolds. The criminal instinct/propensity has penetrated in all walks of life. Some of the personnel of the State functionaries/agencies which are entrusted with the duty to protect the life property and honour of citizens, either themselves actively participate in the commission of the heinous crime or they provide protective umbrella to the criminals. Their credibility has been denuded to the extent that the victims of the crimes do not approach them for their help or protection which they are otherwise entitled to as a matter of right under the Constitution. It has now become common that the accused persons involved in heinous offences, if succeed, in obtaining bail jump the bail bonds. To check such tendency and to provide deterrent, special provisions have been enacted and/or are being enacted in the special statutes prescribing the minimum amount of bail bond. Keeping in view the bleak scenario which has emerged, with the passage of time on account of the lack of respect of the rule of law, and because of the unprecedented continuous steep inflationary tendency resulting in the loss of money value, the Courts should not show any undue leniency while forfeiting bail bond amount. Their approach should be dynamic and progressive oriented with the desire to discourage the accused persons to jump bail bonds. There is no legal requirement that full bail bond amount should not be forfeited, on the contrary, once an accused person jumps bail bond, the entire surety amount becomes liable to be forfeited in the absence of any mitigating circumstances." (2) PLD 1998 Supreme Court

50. Abdul Bari v. Malik Amir Jan and 4 others. (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)...S.514...Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)... Forefeiture of bail bond ...Leave to appeal was granted to consider as to whether forfeiture of bail bond executed by surety to the extend of 25 % was in accordance with law and whether Supreme Court should re- examine the question as to how the surety, in the circumstances of the case would have been extended leniency. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)...S.514...Forfeiture of bail bond ...Reduction of amount to be forfeited .Power of Court Extent ...Power of determining the extent to which the penalty should be exacted should be reasonably exercised ...Court in the context of deteriorating law and order situation prevailing in the country, should be conscious of the hazards of release of accused persons who were dare devils to the knowledge of the sureties and then left them off at their own behest on forfeiture of mere 25 % of he amount of bond... Where the accused person jumped the bail and absconded after committing twin murders in the Court premises and sureties took the plea that they had not stood sureties for the accused person for any monetary benefit or any other gain but on humanitarian basis, Supreme Court ordered the forfeiture of the entire amount of bail bond executed by the sureties in circumstances."

7. Since the accused was charged for having committed the murder of Rehmat ul Azam and Zaurag Muhammad and for whom the petitioners have stood sureties and have executed the bail bonds which have been forfeited and they have been directed to pay Rs.50,000 (Rs.Fifty thousand) each, therefore, I am of the view that the discretion exercised by the Sessions Judge was most proper/judicious and I see no reason to interfere with the same in the circumstances of this case.

8. This Criminal Revision has no substance and is, therefore, dismissed. N.H.Q./370/P Revision petition dismissed.