IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2007 / 26TH ASWINA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2007() ------------------------- C.C.NO.29/04 OF J.F.C.M, CHALAKKUDY PETITIONER: ACCUSED:- --------------------- JOSHY, S/O XAVIER, PALLIYAMAKKAL HOUSE, MELADOOR, ALATHOOR VILLAGE,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENTS: STATE OF KERALA:- ------------------------------ 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 18/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.3202 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of October, 2007 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2004. The petitioner was once enlarged on bail. But on 13.09.07, he could not appear before the learned Magistrate because of his mother's illness. Consequent to his non appearance, a warrant of arrest has been issued by the learned Magistrate against the petitioner. 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. 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 circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not Crl.M.C.No.3202 of 2007 2 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. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C.No.3202 of 2007 3