( 1 ) THE question the arises in this case is whether the bond executed by a surety accused under section 499 of the Code of Criminal Procedure even when no bond has been executed by the accused under thal section is a valid band which can be forieited under Section 514 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( 2 ) TH The facts of the case are that one Banwan Lal who is a milk vendor was proceeded with under the Prevention ol Food Adulteration Act, 1954. He was produced before Shri C. D. Sharnia Magistrate 1st Class Delhi, who by his order dated 6th September, l968, directed Banwari Lal to furn sh a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 2,000. 00 with one surety in the like amount for appearing in the court whenever required. In pursuance of this the petitioner, Priiam Stngb. executed a surety bond in the amount of Rs, 2,000. 00 on l2th September, 1968, undertaking that Banwari Lal would be appearing in the court Irom time to time as may be required until the close oi the trial and if the accused defaults then the petitioner will be liable to forfeit a sum of Rs 2,000 -, Banwari Lal committed a default for appearing in the court on September 19, 1968 and the subsequent hearing The