IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3077 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.2/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, TRIVANDRUM CRIME NO.350/06 OF SREEKARIYAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED (A6): ------------------------- SUNILKUMAR @ KUNJUMON, SUMITH NIVAS, PRATHIBHA NAGAR, NEAR LEKSHAM VEEDU COLONY, EDAVACODE, SREEKARIYAM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.V.PREMAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.3077 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 307 and 395 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. The petitioner was not arrested in the course of the proceedings. The learned Magistrate, on taking cognizance, has issued summons to the petitioner under Section 204 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has not appeared before the learned Magistrate so far. Coercive processes have hence been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner 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. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the Crl.M.C. No.3077 of 2008 2 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. Needless to say, the application for regular bail must be considered by the learned Magistrate in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T 22] as also with consciousness of the fact that at the first instance the discretion was exercised under Section 204 Cr.P.C only to issue a summons and not a warrant. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-