IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2908 of 2008() -------------------------------------- (S.T.NO.974 OF 2007 OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF 1ST CLASS, ADIMALY) PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.1: ---------------------------------------------- RAJESH SHIVARAM, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAIZEN HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD., SHAN APARTMENTS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RAJU BHASKARAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN, BEEPATTU VEEDU, PINDIMANA KARA, PINDIMANA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. 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 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2908 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance has already been taken by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner has not entered appearance so far. Reckoning him as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. 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 Crl.M.C. No. 2908 of 2008 -: 2 :- 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). 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. Crl.M.C. No. 2908 of 2008 -: 3 :- 5. Though various other contentions have been raised in this Crl.M.C. at this stage, after discussions, no other contentions are pressed. I make it clear that the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. will not, in any way, fetter the rights of the petitioner to raise all relevant contentions before the learned Magistrate. 6. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/