IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2617 of 2008() ------------------------- STC.594/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SANTHOSH MATHEW,S/O. ABRAHAM MATHEW URUMBITHADATHIL HOUSE,KUDIYANMALA P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOSEPH SRI.K.K.MOIDEEN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. K.RAJAN, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF GOKULAM CHITTIES AND FINANCE LTD, THALASSERI KANNUR DISTRICT 2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 2617 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2005. Petitioner was not available and at long last he was arrested and produced before the learned Magistrate on 24.4.2008. It is submitted that he was released on bail on that day. The case was posted to 25.4.2008 and on that day the petitioner did not appear. A warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner. He finds such coercive processes chasing him. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. His absence was not willful or deliberate, but on account of reasons beyond his control. He was laid up. The case of the petitioner that he was laid up on 25.4.2008 when he was directed to appear does certainly deserve more careful scrutiny. He is Crl.M.C.No. 2617 of 2008 2 willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 3. It is certainly 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 the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before the learned Magistrate 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe 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 Crl.M.C.No. 2617 of 2008 3 proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. (R. BASANT) Judge tm