IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2007 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 1102 of 2007() ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ YOOSAF, AGED 25 YEARS S/O HAMSAKUTTY CHOLAYIL HOUSE MUNDAKKOTTUKURSI KAYILIYAD SHORANUR BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENTS: --------------------- STATE OF KELRAL REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO. 1102 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2007 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under the provisions of the Copy Right Act. The trial in the case is almost over. The matter stood posted for 313 examination. On that day, the petitioner could not appear before the learned Magistrate. Consequently, the learned Magistrate has issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest to procure the presence of the petitioner. 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. 2. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the CRL.M.C.NO. 1102 OF 2007 -: 2 :- 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). 3. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the 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, unless compelling and exceptional reasons are there. 4. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge