IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2948 of 2008() ------------------------- ST.5147/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- V.S.PRADEEP KUMAR, AGED 44 YEARS, HOUSEL NO.70, KSHC JYOHI NAGAR, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2948 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was once acquitted by the trial court. This Court, in appeal, had set aside the judgment of acquittal and had sent the matter back to the court below for fresh disposal. The petitioner has not entered appearance thereafter. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. The petitioner apprehend imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. He was not aware of the setting aside the judgment of acquittal by this Court in appeal. He had entrusted the case to a counsel; but the counsel had omitted to enter appearance and Crl.M.C. No. 2948 of 2008 -: 2 :- file vakkalath in the said case. It is, in these circumstances, that he happened to be absent before the court below when the matter reached the Magistrate after setting aside the judgment of acquittal. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner 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, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate. 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 the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). Crl.M.C. No. 2948 of 2008 -: 3 :- 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks 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. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/