JUDGMENT

1. I.A.1/2020 is filed for condoning the delay of 298 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application, delay is condoned. I .A.1/2020 is allowed.

2. This is an appeal under Sec. 449 of Criminal Procedure Code. The facts are that the appellant stood as surety for accused No.3 in S.C.2/2013 on the file o f III Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru. Since accused No.3 failed to appear before the court, the surety bond executed by the appellant for Rs.25, 000.00 was forfeited and a separate Criminal Miscellaneous Case bearing 905/2014 was registered against the appellant. The Tahsildar was ordered to attach the property of the appellant. The appellant sought remission in the bond amount by making an application under sec. 446 Cr.P.C. By order dated 30.8 .2017, the court below rejected the appellant's application and hence this appeal.

3. Heard Smt. Haleema Ameen for the appellant and Sri K.Nageshwarappa, the learned Government Pleader.

4. Smt. Haleema Ameen submits that accused No.3 was arrested and after conclusion of trial he was acquitted. In this view, the bail bond of the appellant should not have been forfe