IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3373 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.156/2008 OF VELLARADA POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS:ACCUSED 1 & 2: --------------------------------------------- 1. GEORGEKUTTY, S/O.SKRIA, PUTHUCHIRA VEEDU, KOVILLOOR DESOM, AMBOORI VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA. 2. SABU, S/O.THOMAS, THUDIYAMKONATHU KALATHIL VEEDU, KOVILLOOR, AMBOORI, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT:COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3373 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of September, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w. 34 I.P.C. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners had approached the learned Sessions Judge as also this Court seeking anticipatory bail. The learned Sessions Judge as also another Bench of this Court have dismissed those applications for anticipatory bail. The petitioners have now come to this Court with a prayer that the F.I.R. registered may be quashed invoking the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. Eventhough quashing of the crime is requested in the petition, in the course of the discussions at the Bar, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate, but they apprehend that their applications for bail may not be considered by the Crl.M.C.No. 3373 of 2008 2 learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 3. Having been unsuccessful in the applications for anticipatory bail filed by them and the said orders rejecting the anticipatory bail having not been challenged, I find no merit in the prayer made for issue of direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is incumbent on all courts to consider the bail applications filed before them with expedition. No special or specific direction in each case appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not dispose of the applications to be filed by the petitioners on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. 4. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed with the above observations. (R. BASANT) Judge tm