JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed challenging the order in M.C.No.8/2006 in S.C.No.841/2000 through which a penalty of Rs.10,000/- each was imposed on the appellants, who were sureties to the 2nd accused in S.C.No.841/2000. It is submitted that the appellants had taken all earnest efforts to ensure the presence of the 2nd accused before the Court and that even before the impugned order was passed, the 2nd accused for whom the appellants were sureties, was arrested, produced before the Court and remanded to custody. It is also submitted that the procedure contemplated by Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had not been complied with in as much as no show cause notice was issued to the appellants before imposing penalty. It is also submitted that the 2nd accused has subsequently been acquitted by the Court in S.C.No.841/2000. This Court inThundichi v. State of Kerala; 2009(4)

KLT 148 held as follows:-

“3. It is argued by the learned counsel that going through the order passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, notice was issued to the petitioners only before forfeiture of the bond and after such forfeiture, no notice as contemplated under S.446 of the Code was issued