Konda Rajyam v. The State Of Telangana And Another

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.255 of 2018 ORDER:

Petitioner/accused challenges the notice/order dated 3-6-2016 in Proceedings MC.No.196/2015 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate at Kodad forfeiting the bond earlier executed by him for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on the ground that as per the material placed before him, the petitioner has committed breach of bond by involving in an offence under Section 7(A) r/w 8(e) of Prohibition Act in Crime No.COR.No.64/2016 dt.13.5.2016 of Prohibition & Excise Station, Kodad.

2.

Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned counsel appearing for petitioner/accused and learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 3.

The main grievance of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the said notice was issued by the learned Executive Magistrate ordering forfeiture of the bond without conducting due enquiry contemplated under Sections 107 to 122 Cr.P.C and therefore, manifestly, the order is erroneous and devoid of law. I find force in his submission. 4.

A perusal of the relevant provisions of Cr.P.C would manifest that before forfeiting the bond offered by the party, the duty is cast on the Executive Magistrate to hold enquiry. Ex-facie no enquiry was conducted as contemplated under law before issuing the impugned order. Therefore, the order suffers vice of non-following the procedure. Learned counsel for petitioner relied upon the decision dated 2.6.2017 in Crl.R.C.No. 1404 of 2017 passed by this Court holding in similar circumstances that the order passed by the Executive Magistrate was not maintainable under law and directed the Executive Magistrate to pass appropriate orders strictly in

accordance with the procedure established by law after hearing the petitioner/accused therein.

5.

The said order squarely applies to the instant case on hand as in the instant case also learned Executive Magistrate has not conducted any enquiry before ordering forfeiture of bond. Therefore, Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the impugned order dated 3rd June, 2016 passed in M.C.No.196/2015 is set aside with a direction to the Executive Magistrate, Kodad to pass appropriate orders by following the due process of law after hearing the petitioner.

As a sequel to disposal of the case, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Dated 6th February, 2018.

Note:

Issue C.C.tomorrow.

BO Dvs.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.255 of 2018 Dated 6th February, 2018.