' This revision petition impugns an order, dated 10-5-2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gujranwala.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had stood surety for Muhammad Ashraf who was involved in case F.I.R. No, 86, dated 12-7-1991 registered at Police Station Kot Ladha, District Gujranwala under sections 302, 324, 353 and 34, P.P.C. As an accused alongwith Muhammad Bakhsh co-accused. This was in the sum of Rs,1,00,000. On 12-2-1996 the accused in this case absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender. The surety was served with notice under section 514, Cr.P.C. And against the notice served on him, the petitioner stated that the accused who was declared proclaimed offender may have been either murdered by the police or arrested in some other case.
3. Anyway, the proceedings under section 514, Cr.P.C. Were taken against the petitioner and he was imposed full penalty.
4. Proceedings were also taken against the other surety, but as he was confined in Jail, the action was kept pending until his production before the Court.
5. While addressing arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that Muhammad Ashraf, the accused for whom the petitioner had stood surety, has expired and his case has ultimately abated and this should legally benefit the petitioner because the accused for whom he stood surety no longer exists. The copy of the Death Certificate of the said accused is placed at page 29 of the file and has been seen by the learned counsel for the State.
6. Standing surety for summons is an act of benevolence and until and unless it is established that the surety got the accused released on bail for any ulterior motive, the surety is not to be treated harshly nor punished severely without there being extraordinary circumstances calling for full forfeiture of the surety bond.
7. Reliance in this connection may be placed on the following cases:---
(i) Sardar Khan and others v. The State 1969 PCr.LJ 447; (ii) Ghulam. Haider v. Karim Bakhsh PLD 1963 SC 47 (iii) Muhammad Khan v. The State 1986 PCr.LJ 2028, (iv) Bahadur Khan v. The State 1976 PCr.LJ 1283 and (v) Dilshad Ahmad etc. v. The State 2000 PCr.LJ 172.
8. As after the death of Muhammad Ashraf accused for whom the petitioner had stood surety, the main criminal case itself was abated, this should consequently benefit the present petitioner who is involved in a side issue of having furnished a bail bond for him. The order impugned, therefore, is set aside. The revision petition is thus accepted.