IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Criminal Revision Appln.No.S-23 of 2017

Applicant                       :        Abdul Rehman s/o Nooro Mazari

Through Mr. Abdul Rehman Bhutto,     Advocate

State                                :       Mr.Raja Imtiaz Solangi, A.P.G 

                                                Complainant Sanaullah in person

Date of hearing              :       14.09.2018          

Date of decision             :       14.09.2018                   

O R D E R  

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- The facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant criminal revision application are that the applicant executed a bond in sum of Rs.200,000/- each for release of accused Zuhro and Raza Muhammad in a case outcome of Crime No.143/2010, u/s.302, 337-F(v), 337-L(2), 148, 149 PPC before learned trial Court, which was forfeited on account of failure of the said accused to attend the learned trial Court. Consequently, the applicant was imposed penalty of Rs.200,000/- for each of the accused by learned trial Court vide order dated 19.02.2016, which the applicant has impugned before this Court by way of instant criminal revision application.

2.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the learned trial Court has imposed the penalty upon the applicant without any lawful justification, ignoring the fact that the said accused were already acquitted in very case. By contending so, he sought for reversal of impugned order.

3.                Learned A.P.G and complainant have supported the impugned order.

4.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record,        the perusal whereof reveals that the case against the said accused was kept on dormant file by learned trial Court on account of failure of the complainant and his witnesses  and  consequently, they were ordered to be released on execution of bail bond in the sum of Rs.200,000/- each, which the applicant executed. Subsequently, the complainant appeared before learned trial Court and sought for reopening of the case which was ordered accordingly and the said accused were called to attend the learned trial Court, which they failed to attend timely, which entailed the penal action against the applicant on account of forfeiture of his bail. On coming to know of the reopening of the case against them, both of the said accused surrendered before learned trial Court and after due trial were acquitted by learned trial Court vide judgment dated 27.04.2017. In that situation, ordering the applicant to pay the above said penal amount on account of forfeiture of his bond apparently was uncalled for.

5.                In view of the above, the impugned order could not be sustained, it is set aside.

6.                The instant criminal revision application is disposed of accordingly.                                                                                                                                                                       JUDGE