IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2009 / 25TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 210 of 2009 -------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 292/2008 OF THE POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION) .............. PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1,4,6,7,8,9 & 10: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BICHU.S, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. SUDEVAN, VAIDYA MANIDIRAM, OYOOR WARD, VELINALLOOR PANCHAYATH, OYOOR.P.O. 2. THAMPI @ MELOOTTU THAMPI, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, MELOOTTU VEEDU, OYOOR.P.O., KALLADU WARD, POOYAPPALLY PANCHAYATH. 3. ANEESH.S, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. SADIDHARAN PILLAI, SWARARAGAM, OYOOR.P.O., VELINALLOOR, OYOOR. 4. SREEJITH, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O. SASIDHARAN, SREEJITH BHAVAN, NETTAYAM.P.O., AMBALAMKUNNU. 5. RENJITH.R., AGED 19 YEARS, S/O. RAGHU NADHAN, REJITH BHAVAN, NETTAYAM.P.O., AMBALAMKUNNU, ELAMADU PANCHAYATH. 6. VISHNU RAJ, AGED 16 YEARS, S/O. N. BABU RAJAN PILLAI, VISHNU VILASAM, CHERUVAKKAL.P.O, AYOOR. 7. MANIKANTAN, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. NATARAJAN, PARAVILA VEEDU, NETTAYAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN. CRL.M.C. NO. 210/2009: RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P. RAVEENDRA BABU. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.210 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioners along with the co-accused face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 326 and 308 r/w 149 I.P.C. Final report has been filed. Cognizance has already been taken. Committal Proceedings has been registered. The petitioners were not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter. Reckoning them as absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioners. Such processes are chasing the petitioners. They apprehend imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. They are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But they apprehend that their application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioners. 3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the Crl.M.C. No.210 of 2009 2 circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider such application on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. 4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the specific observation that if the petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate and apply for 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself, in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T 22]. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioners. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-