IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2661 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.437/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VARKALA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ BIJU, S/O.AMEEN, MATHERU VILAKOM, NEAR MOSQUE, VAKKOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.BANI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2661 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment as the 1st accused in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 394 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. The case has been registered in 2008. The petitioner was not arrested and has not appeared before the learned Magistrate so far. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, the learned Magistrate has issued coercive processes against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. 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. Crl.M.C. No.2661 of 2008 2 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 Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has to attend an interview on 19.07.08 and great hardship, loss and prejudice would be suffered by him if he were arrested before 19.07.08. In the peculiar facts and circumstances Crl.M.C. No.2661 of 2008 3 of this case, there shall be a direction that the coercive processes issued against the petitioner in C.C.No.439 of 2008 by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Varkala shall not be executed till 21.07.08. On or before that date, the petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-