IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 4086 of 2011() ------------------------------ LP.15/2003 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, ALAPPUZHA (CRMP.338/2011) .................... PETITIONER(S):7TH ACCUSED ----------------------------------- KRISHNA PRAKASH, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 30 YEARS,THURUTHEL,THIRUVANDOOR P.O, CHENGANNOOR BY ADVS. SRI.P.HARIDAS SMT.SIKKY RAVISHANKAR SRI.LIJI KUTTAPPAN RESPONDENT(S):STATE & COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM 682 031 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs CRMC. NO. 4086/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1:COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C NO.2734 OF 2010 DATED 20.07.2010 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE 2:COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MP NO.338 OF 2011 IN L.P. NO.15/2003 DATED 28.6.2011 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT(ADHOC)-II,ALAPPUZHA. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4086 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of November 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is the 7th accused in L.P.No.15/2003 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc)-II, Alappuzha. The offences alleged against him are under Secs.143, 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that other accused were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge and that the matter was in fact settled. An application was filed on behalf of this petitioner for an order of discharge. A detailed order was passed by the learned Sessions Judge dismissing the petition. 2. It is important to note that for the last 8 years, the petitioner has been absconding. The contention that the further proceedings against him has to be quashed is devoid of any merit. Since the petition for discharge has already been dismissed, the argument that there are no grounds to proceed against this petitioner is also found to be bereft of any merit. Copy of the judgment acquitting other accused has not been produced. It is stated by the petitioner that no overt act causing Crl.M.C. No.4086 of 2011 -: 2 :- injury to the injured was attributed against the petitioner. But the charge sheet has not been produced to convince that fact. 3. Now, the only request is that the learned trial Judge may be directed to grant bail to the accused or to dispose of the bail application on the same date. No such direction can be issued in the light of the Division Bench decision in Martin v. State of Kerala reported in [2004 (2) KLT 1037]. The petitioner has to convince the court below showing the reason for his absence for the last so many years and also the fact that the case was settled, if as a matter of fact that the case was actually settled. The court below will dispose of the bail application as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J UDGE. Jvt