1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1623 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.

GOPALAKRISHNA POOJARY

S/O RAGHAV POOJARY

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

R/O 5-123 RATHA BEEDI

VITLA KASABA, VITTAL

BANTWAL TALUK

DAKSHINA KANNADA - 574 243

2.

NAGAMMA @ NAGRATHNA

W/O GOPAKRISHNA POOJARY

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

R/O 5-123 RATHA BEEDI

VITLA KASABA, VITTAL

BANTWAL TALUK

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 243

&APPELLANTS

(BY SRI DINESH KUMAR.K. RAO., ADVOCATE

FOR SRI R.B.DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

ULLAL POLICE STATION

MANGALORE CITY

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 020

(REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001)

&RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP)

2

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 449 OF

CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05.02.2018,

PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SESSION AND SPL. JUDGE.D.K.,

MANGALORE IN SPL.CASE NO.80/2017, FORFEITING AND BOND OF

THE APPELLANTS AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECTING TO PAY BOND

AMOUNT OF RS.25,000/- EACH AND DISCHARGE THE APELLANTS OF

THEIR SURETY-SHIP/BOND.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for

respondent/State.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for appellants and learned

High Court Government Pleader.

3.

Accepting

the

cause

shown

in

the

affidavit

accompanying I.A.No.1/2021, delay in preferring the appeal is

condoned. I.A.No.1/2021 is allowed.

4.

This appeal is preferred against the order dated

05.02.2018 passed in Special Case.No.80/2017 on the file of the

Court of Principal Sessions and Special Judge, D.K., Mangaluru,

forfeiting the bond of the appellants and directing them to pay

the bond amount of Rs.25,000/- each.

3

5.

The material on record disclose that the appellants

stood as surety for the accused in Special Case.No.80/2017 and

each of them executed bond for Rs.25,000/-. For non-

appearance of the accused, bonds executed by them came to be

forfeited on 05.02.2018. Non-bailable warrant issued to the

accused was unexecuted, hence, the trial Court has passed the

impugned order directing the appellants to pay the bond amount

of Rs.25,000/- each, holding that they have violated the

conditions of the bond.

6.

There is no illegality in the order passed by the trial

Court. The contention of the learned counsel for appellants that

the bond was forfeited without giving an opportunity to the

appellants cannot be accepted. However, the fact remains that

even after issuance of non-bailable warrants, the accused has

not been traced. Appellants are the husband and wife.

Considering the facts and circumstances and also to meet the

ends of justice, the bond amount is hereby reduced from

Rs.25,000/- each to Rs.12,500/- each, which shall be deposited

before the trial Court within a period of two weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this order. To the above extent, impugned

order is modified.

4

The appeal is disposed of.

SD/-

JUDGE

HB/-