IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 612 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.441/02 OF PAYANGADI POLICE STATION CC.263/2007 of J.M.F.C.,PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.8 TO 10 ----------------------------------------------- 1. BHASKARAN.V.V., S/O.KARUNAKARAN, AGED 41 YEARS, VADAKKE VEETTIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM KANONNUR, KAITHAPRAM, PANAPPUZHA AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. K.SANTHOSH, S/O.ACHUTHAN, AGED 35 YEARS, KOYILERIYAN HOUSE, EZHOME AMSOM, NARIKODE DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. M.G.VINOD @ SWAMI VINOD, S/O.GOPALA PILLAI, AGED 34 YEARS, MLATHADATHIL HOUSE, PULIMPARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PAYANGADI POLICE STATION (CR.NO.441/02 OF PAYANGADI POLICE STATION, KANNUR DT.), REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 612 OF 2008 B ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008 O R D E R Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under sections 452 and 153A IPC. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Warrants of arrest against the petitioners have been issued by the courts below. The petitioners find such warrants chasing them. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioners are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But they apprehend that their application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. They, therefore, pray that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to BA.612/08 : 2 : the learned Magistrate to release the petitioners on bail when they appear and apply for bail. 3. After the decision in Bharat Chaudhary and another Vs. State of Bihar [AIR 2003 SC 4662], it is now trite that powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. can be invoked in favour of a person who apprehends arrest in execution of a non-bailable warrant issued by a court in a pending proceedings. But even for that, sufficient and satisfactory reasons must be shown to exist. I am not persuaded, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that any such reasons exist. 4. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate, the circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I find absolutely no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioners on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do BA.612/08 : 3 : the same. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have been issued in Alice George Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003 (1) KLT 339]. 5. In the result, this petition is dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioners surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply 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. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks