1. The applicant had stood surety for an accused person who eras facing trial in the Court of Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Sukkur. Subsequently the case was transferred to Special Judge, Anti- Corruption, Hyderabad, but again, after some time, it was transferred to Special Judge, Sukkur. The accused person remained absent. Consequently the bail bonds were forfeited, and the applicant was directed to pay the penalty.
2. The order was attacked on the ground that since the case had been transferred to Special Judge, Hyderabad the liability of the applicant under the surety bond extinguished and, therefore, the 4earned Special Judge, Sukkur had no power to forfeit the bond and call upon the applicant to pay the penalty. I find no force in this contention. The bail bond was executed before the Special Judge, Sukkur for his appearance before that Court and it was also forfeited by the same Court for the non-appearance of the accused person. The applicant had executed the surety bond and had guaranteed the appearance of the accused person before that Court. `Since that accused person remained absent breach of the termsof the bond was committed and the penalty was entailed.
3. In the alternative the learned counsel prayed for the reduction of the amount of the surety bond. I accept this prayer. I, the fore, reduce the amount from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 2,000. With this modification the revision application is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.