IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3379 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.43/08 OF KATTAKADA EXCISE RANGE .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------ RADHA, AGED 36, D/O SARASAMMA PILLA, BHARANI ARAKUZHIMELEPUTHEN VEETTIL, MARANALLUR, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.3379 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of September, 2008 ORDER Petitioner, a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner was not arrested when the offences allegedly detected for the reason that women officials were not available in the detecting party. The petitioner was not thereafter arrested. Final report has already been filed before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner is not sure whether cognizance has been taken and any process has been issued against her. 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. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the Crl.M.C. No.3379 of 2008 2 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 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]. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-