Allowed

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Feb 2010Crl.Rev.Pet/367/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 367 of 2010, the High Court of Kerala held that since the revision petitioners were not privy to the accused's abscondance and offered no explanation for his non-appearance, the Magistrate was not justified in imposing the full bond as penalty. The court reduced the penalty to Rs.7,500/- each. [Case summary: High Court reduces excessive penalty under S.446 Cr.P.C. from bond amou

What did the court decide?

The penalty imposed on the revision petitioners is reduced to Rs.7,500/- each; they are directed to deposit the amount within one month.

Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 367 of 2010()

¶6

----------------------------CRMP.3220/2009 of SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM MC.28/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PUNALUR

¶7

REVN. PETITIONERS:PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER:-

¶8

¶9

THOMAS. AGED 54, S/O. ABRAHAM, KIZHAKKE THAZHATHIL VEEDU, ARAYANKAVU VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

JAYADHARAN, S/O.THYAGARAJAN, AGED 46,THYAGARAJA BHAVANAM,RAJATHOTTAM, ARYANKAVU VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. MR. R.SURAJ KUMAR

¶12

MR. N.AJITH

¶13

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/STATE

¶14

¶15

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY THE PUBLIC PROSEDCUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

ADV. MR. P.A. SALIM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

V. RAMKUMAR , J.

¶19

Crl. R.P. No. 367 of 2010

¶20

---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2010.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The revision petitioners were the sureties for the sole accused in C.P. No. 124 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Punalur. The bond amount was Rs.50,000/- each. Consequent on the non-appearance of the accused, the learned Magistrate initiated the proceedings against the petitioners as M.C. No. 28 of 2009 (L.P. No. 67 of 2010) under Section 446 Cr.P.C. To the show cause notice issued to them, they did not respond to the same nor did they offer any reasonable explanation for the nonappearance of the accused. Thereupon consistent with the undertaking given by them, the learned Magistrate imposed the bond amount as penalty. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Magistrate, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Sessions Court, Kollam with a petition to condone the delay of 125 days filed as Crl. M.P. No. 3220 of 2009. The learned

¶23

Crl.R.P. No. 367/2010

¶24

: 2 :

¶25

Sessions Judge dismissed the petition to condone the delay and consequently the appeal was also dismissed as time barred. Hence this revision.

¶26

In as much as there is nothing to show that the petitioners were privies to the abscondance of the accused who is alleged to have slipped out of the country, the learned Magistrate was not justified in imposing the bond amount as penalty. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that a sum of Rs.7,500/- each shall be the reasonable and fair penalty. Accordingly, the penalty imposed on the revision petitioners is reduced to Rs.7,500/- each and they shall deposit the amount of penalty within one month from today.

¶27

This revision is disposed of as above.

¶28

Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2010.

¶29

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶30

¶31

Crl.R.P. No. 367/2010 : 3 :

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaffer Sadique @ Jaffer Vs State

P.Babu Vs State of Kerala

Anish Babu, S/O.Vokkan, C.NO.5378 Vs State of Kerala

Sreejith Vs State of Kerala

Manoj J.Chirayath Vs Sukanya Kuries and Loans Pvt.Ltd

D.a.Mohammad Vs N.T.Kunhiraman and Another