IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1936 of 2008() ----------------------------- SC.6/2008 of I ADDL.SUB COURT, THRISSUR CRIME NO.50/2003 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION .................... : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ---------------------------------------- NIJITH, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, NELLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANTHIKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE, ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.1936 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the 1st accused. He faces indictment in a prosecution, inter alia, under Section 308 r/w 149 I.P.C. The case is pending before the Sessions Court. All the co-accused have already been tried, found not guilty and acquitted. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him has been split up. He was employed abroad. He was released on bail at the committal stage. But thereafter the petitioner could not appear before the Sessions Court as he had secured employment and was compelled to be abroad in connection with his employment. The petitioner now finds coercive processes issued by the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge chasing him. 2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But he apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance B.A.No.1936 of 2008 2 with law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 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 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 bail application 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.1936 of 2008 3