IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2008 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4825 of 2008() ------------------------------------ LP.453/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOLLAM C.P. NO.126/2005 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOLLAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- CHERUPUSHPAM, W/O.SHAJI, SANTHOSH COTTAGE, (USHA BHAVAN)FATHIMA JUNCTION, PADAPPAKKARA, PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNDARA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4825 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of December, 2008 ORDER Petitioner, a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution under the Kerala Abkari Act. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal Proceedings has been registered. The petitioner was not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent. Her absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. She is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But she apprehends that her 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 petitioner. Crl.M.C. No.4825 of 2008 2 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which she 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 petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies 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, expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself and in the light of the dictum 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 petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-