IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2008 / 3RD ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2365 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.97/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOTTARAKKARA CRIME NO.892/04 OF THE KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SAMKUTTY,S/O. DANIEL, KOLAZHIKATH HOUSE KAKKATHANAM, VILANGARA MURI, UMMANNOOR VILLAGE BY ADV. SRI.D.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.PRASAD GANDHI RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2008 ALONG WITH CRMC NO.2369/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. Nos.2365 & 2369 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2008 ORDER These petitions are filed by the common petitioner who faces indictment in two separate prosecutions – one under Sec.308 of the IPC and the other under Sec.326 of the IPC. In both cases, investigation is complete. Final reports have been filed. Cognizance has been taken. One case is pending as committal proceedings; whereas the other is pending as Calendar Case. The petitioner was enlarged on bail in one case. But consequent to his non-appearance, coercive processes have been issued against him in that case. In the other, he has not appeared at all. Coercive processes issued by the learned Magistrate in these two cases are chasing the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. Crl.M.C. Nos.2365 & 2369 of 2008 -: 2 :- His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, these Crl.M.Cs. are dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the Crl.M.C. Nos.2365 & 2369 of 2008 -: 3 :- learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say, the application for bail in the Sessions Case will have to be considered in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22). (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/