IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 343 of 2009() ------------------------ C.C.N.220/05 OF J.F.M.C-II, THRISSUR PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- A.K.SREENIVASAN, S/O.EDATHEZHATH KUNJU EZHUTHACHAN, P.O.AVINISSERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE P.PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.343 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 325 I.P.C. All offences are compoundable. Final report has been filed. Cognizance was taken. The petitioner had entered appearance and was enlarged on bail. Thereafter the petitioner was appearing before the court below for some time. But subsequently on account of the compulsions of his employment abroad, he could not appear before the learned Magistrate. Coercive processes have been issued against him by the learned Magistrate. Such processes are chasing the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. His absence was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the dispute between the parties have been settled and the complainant has compounded the offences alleged against the Crl.M.C. No.343 of 2009 2 petitioner. The petitioner and the complainant are brothers. In these circumstances the petitioner wants to appear before the learned Magistrate and report composition. It is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C as the petitioner apprehends that his application for bail may not be taken up for consideration on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously and that his application for composition may not be considered on the date of surrender itself. 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 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 Crl.M.C. No.343 of 2009 3 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. 5. Since the petitioner submits that the matter has been settled, the petitioner along with the victim can appear before the learned Magistrate on the date of surrender itself. They can apply for composition. The learned Magistrate must consider such application for composition also on the date of surrender itself. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be a direction that the coercive processes issued against the petitioner shall not be executed till 31.01.09. On or before that date, the petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate and make necessary applications. 6. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-