IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4952 of 2008() ----------------------------------- L.P. NO.28/1998 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, THAMARASSERY. ..... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- P.ABDUL SALAM, S/O. MUHAMMED, PUTHENTHERUVIL VEEDU, THACHUMPOYIL P.O. THARAMASSERY, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION, THAMARASSERY. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4952 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 395 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. All the co- accused faced trial. They have already been found not guilty and acquitted by now. The petitioner, it is submitted, was arrested in the course of investigation and after his remaining in custody for some period of time, he was enlarged on bail. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him was split up and was pending before the Magistrate as a Committal Proceedings. The same has been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases now. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such process. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. Compulsions of his employment compelled him to go to his place of employment abroad and that is why he was not able to appear before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends Crl.M.C. No.4952 of 2008 2 imminent arrest. The petitioner is now willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But But he apprehends that his 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 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 prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Crl.M.C. No.4952 of 2008 3 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]. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-