NARASIMHAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS petn is against the appellate order of the Dist Mag of Boudh-Phulbani dismissing an appeal filed by the petnrs against the order of a 1st class Mag, boudh, forfeiting their bond executed in a case under Schedule 20/471,. P. C. in the Ct, of the said Mag. Two persons named Nrusing Meher and Hrusikesh meher were accused persons in that case. On 11-11-48 when they appeared before the S. D. M. they were directed to be released on bail of Rs. 1,000/ each and then the case was transferred to the file of a 1st class Mag named Sri S. B. Mohapatra for disposal. Then the two petnrs acting as sureties for the accused persons executed a bond undertaking to produce them before the Ct on such dates as may be fixed. Strangely enough the accused persons themselves were not required to execute bonds for their appearance before the ct on several successive dates. Whether this omission was due to oversight or not it is difficult to say. But whatever that may be the fact remains that there is on record no bond signed by the ac cused persons for their appearance on successive dates.

( 2 ) THE main point of law urged by Mr. Das in support of this petn is that a bond executed