IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4133 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.70/2007 of ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED:- ------------------------ PRADEEP T. S/O. GEORGE, CHIRATHALAKKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, PARASUVAIK 1 P.O., PARASSALA. BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OFKERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 4133 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.120B and 308 IPC. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been registered. The petitioner was not arrested during the crime stage or thereafter. After cognizance has been taken, the petitioner has not appeared before the learned Magistrate allegedly on the ground that notice, process or summons of the court has not been served on him. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. He apprehends imminent arrest. The petitioner has now come to this Court with this petition Crl.M.C. No. 4133 of 2008 -: 2 :- under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that direction may be issued to ensure that the dictum in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339) and Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) is complied with and that the petitioner's application for regular bail is considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. 2. I am not persuaded to agree that any special or specific direction deserves to be issued. Sufficient general directions have already been issued by this Court in the decision in Alice George and Sukumari (supra). I am not satisfied that any special or separate direction deserves to be issued in each case to the learned Magistrate to comply with the directions in Alice George and Sukumari (supra). I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate shall not follow the decision in Alice George and Sukumari (supra). If there be non-compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are Crl.M.C. No. 4133 of 2008 -: 3 :- available to the petitioner. 3. This application is dismissed, but with the above specific observations. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge