2009 PLP 1432 (MLD)

KHADIM HUSSAIN M. SHAIKH, J.

By this common order, I intend to dispose of above two Criminal Revision Applications, as they arise out of the same Sessions Case No.197 of 2008 re: State v. Abdul Majeed and others, based on Crime No.5 of 2007 under sections 302, 147, 148, P.P.C. P.S. Dilmurad. The applicants, by these Criminal Revision Applications, have called in question two orders, passed by learned Court of Sessions Judge, Jacobabad on 28-2-2009 in the above Sessions Case, whereby the applicants, who stood sureties for accused Abdul Majeed in the said case, were imposed full surety amount of Rs.300,000 each on account of forfeiture of their surety bonds. The facts giving rise to the present Revision Applications are that accused Abdul Majeed son of Allah Khan by caste Bangulani was facing his trial in the above Sessions Case before the learned Court of Sessions Judge Jacobabad. The said accused Abdul Majeed was admitted to bail by the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Jacobabad vide order, dated 24-4-2008 subject to furnishing two solvent surites in the sum of Rs.300,000 each. The present applicants stood sureties and furnished bail bonds in the above sums for the release of accused Abdul Majeed, who then was released on 28-4-2008. Record reflects that accused Abdul Majeed jumped the bail on 19-8-2008 thereafter the said accused never appeared before learned trial Court and thus became fugitive from the law. On failure of the applicants to secure the availability of the said accused Abdul Majeed, they were proceeded against under the provisions of section 514, Cr.P.C. and their surety bonds were forfeited in full vide order, dated 28-2-2009 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jacobabad. Hence these Criminal Revision Application. Learned counsel for the applicants has mainly contended that present applicants had stood sureties for accused Abdul Majeed on humanitarian grounds without any monetary benefit and the impugned orders, dated 28-2-2009 are harsh and are on higher side. He conceding the position that the applicants whose bail bonds have been forfeited, states that financial position of the applicants is not sound and they are unable to pay the surety amount in full, therefore, he prays for taking a lenient view. Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, learned State Counsel also concedes. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed before the Court. There is nothing on the record to show if the applicants had gained any monetary benefit by. standing sureties for accused Abdul Majeed in the above mentioned case. The financial 'position of the applicants is also stated to be unsound and in view of the principle of keeping balance between undue leniency and undue severity, the amount of surety bonds of each applicants is reduced from Rs.300,000 to Rs.150,000 each. Consequently Criminal Revision Applications are partly allowed and the surety bonds are forfeited to the above extent. The applicants shall pay the above amount, of surety bonds that is to say Rs.150,000 (Rupees One Lac Fifty thousands) each within a period of 60 days from the date of this order without fail. Order accordingly. H.B.T./M-168/K Order accordingly.