IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 266 of 2009(U) ------------------------- CRIME NO.789/08 OF VADANAPILLY POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------- 1. JOHN.M.A S/O.ANTONY.M.A, MANGATT HOUSE, VADUTHALA, KOCHI. 2. SHEENI.K.G., S/O.GOPALAN, KOZHISSERY HOUSE, KARA, KODUNGALLUR, TRICHUR. 3. ROMY IMMANUEL, VALIYATHAIKKAL (H), BISHOP GARDEN, PATTALAM, FORT KOCHI. 4. K.V.MANOJ, S/O.VIDHYADHARAN.K.C. KURUPASSERY (H), PALAPARAMBIL, KADEBHAGAM, PALLURUTHY. 5. SHOIN MATHEW, KANISSERYPARAMBIL, MALIAKKAL ROAD, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.266 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable under Section 395 I.P.C. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. It is submitted that another Bench of this Court has already rejected the application for anticipatory bail. Investigation is still in progress. The petitioner has not challenged the order refusing grant of anticipatory bail. Instead, the petitioner has come to this Court with a prayer for issue of directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. What directions do the petitioners seek ? The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate. They only pray that their application for bail may be considered on merits and bail may be granted to them on the date of surrender itself. 3. I am afraid, the request cannot be accepted. The petitioners' application for anticipatory bail has admittedly been Crl.M.C. No.266 of 2009 2 dismissed. They have not chosen to challenge the said order. They must surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail. At this juncture, I am not persuaded to agree that any specific or special directions can or need be issued in favour of the petitioners. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. It is the duty of every court to consider the applications for bail filed by persons surrendering before it as expeditiously as possible. The learned Magistrate must do the same in accordance with law after giving notice to the prosecution. It is not necessary to issue any specific or special directions in the matter. 4. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed, but with the observation that the application for bail to be filed by the petitioners on their appearance before the Investigating Officer/learned Magistrate must be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioners. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-