IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2270 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.26/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, PALAKKAD CRIME NO.126/06 OF MALAMPUZHA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- GIRISH KUMAR, S/O. BALASUBRAMANIAN 'SREELAKAM' GANDHINAGAR, MALAMPUZHA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2270 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioner is the 1st accused in a prosecution for offences punishable under Section 498 A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken. There are co-accused also. The petitioner was unable to appear before the learned Magistrate. The case against him has been split up as per order dated 07.05.08. The case against the co-accused has been posted to 19.06.08 for commencement of trial for examination of the witnesses. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner finds such processes chasing him. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner 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.2270 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes a request that on surrender of the petitioner, the petitioner may be directed to be tried along with the co-accused on 19.06.08 as the main case stands scheduled for trial on that date. The petitioner can make that request before the learned Magistrate. It is only Crl.M.C. No.2270 of 2008 3 reasonable that the learned Magistrate must accept the said request and pass appropriate orders. No further or better directions appear to be necessary. 6. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-