Ali Jan petitioner, being aggrieved by the order, dated 17-1-1989 of the learned Sessions Judge, Bannu, by which the petitioner has been called upon to deposit a sum of Rs.15,000 in respect of the surety bond executed by him, for due appearance of Mir Shah Jehan, before the said Court, in a case under section 302, P.P.C. On account of accused's failure to appear, has filed this petition, on the grounds mentioned therein.
2. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khan Kundi, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was pressing this revision petition in respect of the quantum of the forfeited surety bond, in view of the case reported in PLD 1963 SC 47. He maintained that on the authority of august Supreme Court cited earlier, there was nothing on the record to show that the petitioner stood surety for monetary consideration, but in fact he being the real brother, out of sheer benevolent consideration, stood surety for the accused and as such the amount of surety bond ought to be reasonably reduced.
3. The learned Assistant Advocate-General has conceded that there is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner stood surety for monetary consideration and as such forfeiture of the half of the surety bond was not called for and, therefore, the amount of forfeiture may be reduced.
4. Keeping in view the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Advocate-General and also the fact that the petitioner being the brother of the accused stood surety out o: benevolent considerations. I would reduce the forfeited amount of Rs.15,000 to Rs.7,500 only, but would otherwise maintain the impugned order.
5. This revision petition stands disposed of in terms of the above order.