JUDGMENT :

[Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.]

1. Heard Shri Safiullah learned counsel for the revisionists and Shri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This revision has been preferred against judgement and order dated 12.5.2022 passed by Special Judge POCSO Act Sambhal at Chandausi in Criminal Misc. Case No. 09 of 2022, Computer Case No. 76 of 2022 (State Vs. Chandrapal and Others) arising out of S.S.T. No. 34 of 2020 (State Vs. Faisal) Case Crime No. 207 of 2020 Police Station- Behjoi District- Sambhal.

3. By the impugned order, the Court below has ordered the revisionists to deposit Rs. 50,000/-as surety amount after forfeiture of surety of entire amount of Rs. 1,00000/-.

4. The present revision has been filed on the ground that the order is illegal and against the weight of evidence on record and based on surmises and conjuncture. The revisionists were not aware of the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. against them, when they came to know, they searched the accused -Faisal and asked him to surrender before the Court below. The revisionists are very poor persons and do labour work to earn their livelihood. They went to Delhi for labour work and their family had no knowledge of the aforesaid proceedings launched against them. The revisionists moved an application 9 B before the Court below to remit the amount on the aforesaid ground but the Court below remitted the amount to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-to be deposited within two days. The Court below taken the custody of accused and sent him to jail, therefore, the impugned order is against the law and not sustainable in the eye of law and liable to be set-aside. If this Court does not remit the surety amount of Rs 50,000/-, the revisionists shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

5. The copy of the impugned order alongwith affidavit has been annexed with the revision.

6. Vide order dated 15.10.2022 this Court had allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. and both the revisionists had executed surety bond in compliance of order of this Court for release of the accused Faisal. Perusal of order dated 31.3.2022 shows that in spite of process under Section 83, the accused Faisal did not appear, therefore, notices were issued to the revisionists which were served upon them; consequently surety bonds were forfeited and a criminal misc. Case U/S 446 Cr.P.C. was registered and an order was passed to recover the surety amount of Rupees one lakh through District Magistrate Sambhal.

7. On 10.5.2022 accused-Faisal appeared and requested to take him into judicial custody and thereafter further proceeding of the sessions trial was conducted. It is orally informed by learned counsel for the revisionists that after conclusion of the trial, the accused Faisal has been convicted.

8. Before the trial Court, both the revisionists moved an application on 10.5.2022 stating that they were not knowing that accused Faisal is absconding; after coming to know, they searched the accused at the probable places but he had gone to the eastern part of the country. They could not know about the recovery proceeding, when they found the accused, they brought him before the Court and prayed that the accused may be taken into custody and recovery proceeding against them be terminated.

9. After hearing the revisionists, the trial Court concluded that though the sureties have produced the accused on 10.5.2022 but before that the surety amount of the surety bond had already been forfeited in favour of the State under Section 446 (3) Cr.P.C. After recording the reason, the Court remitted the amount to the extent of Rs. 50,000/-and directed to deposit the amount of Rs. 50,000/-instead of Rs. 1,00000/-within two days.

10. Against the aforesaid order the revisionists have preferred this revision on the ground that they are very poor labour and anyhow they are pulling on their life and anyhow feeding themselves and their family members; they are unable to pay such a huge amount; they should either totall