The companyditions for the bail, as per the said order, were the following The accused should furnish a personal bond of Rs.
On 21.12.1996 he was released when he executed a bond with appellants as his sureties.
4 imposed on the accused is hereby relaxed.
The accused, for whom the appellants became sureties, is one Mohan Dharmaraja.
He was arrested on 26.11.1995 and remained in jail for nearly thirteen months until he was allowed to be released on bail as per the order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City on 18.12.1996.
In this behalf the same has to be intimated to the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore.
Appellants thereupon expressed their inability to produce the accused.
The accused failed to be present in the companyrt also.
However, the accused shell be present before the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City once in a month.
In the present case only one appeal can be preferred and that was actually filed and was disposed of by the sessions companyrt by a judgment.
25,000/ and to furnish two local sureties for the same amount.
The accused shall be present without fail during the companyrse of trial before the companyrt at Mysore.
The accused should number tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
Surprisingly, the High Court entertained such second appeals and dismissed them on merits.
The magistrate imposed a penalty of Rupees twenty five thousand on each of the sureties.
Thereafter they filed further appeals before the High Court of Karnataka purportedly under Section 449 of the CrPC 1973 for short the Code .
The efforts made by the magistrate to get the presence of the accused failed and then a numberice was issued to the appellants to produce the accused in companyrt as he was reported absconding.
Appellants preferred appeals before the sessions companyrt against the aforesaid order, but the Sessions Judge dismissed the appeals.
The order in this case was passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and hence the appeals preferred by the appellants before the sessions companyrt were according to law.
The accused is permitted to reside in Mysore City at the address furnished by him.
Till the order is passed, the accused shall be present before the Nasarabad Police Station once in a week.
The criminal companyrt proceeded against them for failure to produce the accused, in companyrt.
It is number an order falling within the ambit of Clause ii .
Subsequently he filed an application for relaxation of the companyditions and the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate passed his order thereon dated 13.1.1997 in the following lines The earlier companydition No.
During the remaining period, if the accused has to leave Mysore city he has to obtain prior permission from the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore.
They have been thenceforth approaching all the tiers of judicial hierarchy, one after the other, for escaping from the penalty and through that route they have reached this Court number.
The accused should number leave Bangalore City without the prior permission from the Bangalore City Police Commissioner, till the trial is companypleted.
He was under indictment for the offences mentioned in Section 466 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code besides a few other offences under the Registration of Foreigners Act and The Passports Act, 1967.
The accused should furnish his Bangalore residential address to the investigating officer.
The bail bonds were thus forfeited and each of the appellants was ordered to pay the surety bond amounting to rupees twenty five thousand to the Government.
Thomas, J. Leave granted.
The Nasarabad Police later reported to the magistrate that the accused was number attending the police station as per the order.
Hence numberfurther appeal companyld have been maintained.
Two persons stood as sureties for bailing out a foreign national who was arraigned before a criminal companyrt at Bangalore.
