' Muhammad Shah son of Sardar Shah has filed this revision petition challenging the order, dated 21-3-1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura whereby he forfeited the bail bonds and directed Muhammad Shah petitioner to deposit R. 5,000 and similarly Shabbir Shah to deposit Rs,2,000 as penalty. Shabbir Shah was an accused of a case under section 11 of Offences of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. He was granted interim bail subject to the submission of bonds in the sum of Rs,20,000 with one surety in the like amount. Shabbir Shah petitioner submitted his bail bond and Muhammad Shah stood his surety and submitted surety bonds accordingly. Shabbir Shah petitioner absented from the Court on 14-2-1990 and, therefore, the case was adjourned to 26-2-1990 on which date the petitioner sent a medical certificate, the correctness of which was ordered to be verified from the concerned quarter and the hearing of the case (bail application) was adjourned to 5-3-1990 on which date the accused again did not appear. Therefore, Shabbir Shah accused and Muhammad Shah, his surety before the Court were directed to pay the penalty.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the learned Court below without adopting the proper procedure under section 514, Cr.P.C. Passed the impugned order. However, he submits that if the amount of penalty is reduced, -he would be satisfied.
3. From the order it appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has provided maximum opportunities to the accused Shabbir Shah to appear before the Court, but all in vain. Shabbir Shah after obtaining the interim bail, on one or the other pretext avoided to appear before the Court most probably for the fear of non-confirmation of interim bail. The proceedings in the bail applications were adjourned to number of dates to enable the petitioner to appear before the Court but with no fruitful result whereafter there was no option with the Court except to pass the order of forfeiture of bonds as provided under section 514, Cr.P.C. The learned trial Court has already shown the lenient view and imposed the penalty of Rs,5,000 which is nominal in the present time. So far as the case of Shah Muhammad petitioner is concerned, there is nothing on the record to suggest that he had any other consideration except the benevolence of the accused.
His case stands on different footings and the penalty imposed on him is, therefore, reduced to Rs, 500 with this modification in the order of the forfeiture of the bonds, this revision petition is disposed of.