IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2360 of 2008() ------------------------- C.C.NO.288/05 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- CHANDRIKA, AGED 51 YEARS, CHANDRIKA, BHAVAN (PRIYANKA) PALLIMAN VILLAGE, CHATHANNUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 1. SANTHOSH KUMAR, S/O.THANKAPPAN, ASWATHY, KOLPADU, CHATHANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM. 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 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2360 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioner was served. She had appeared before the learned Magistrate through her counsel. She had prayed for time. That request was allowed earlier. The petitioner has not entered appearance. Coercive processes have hence been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate reckoning her as absconding accused. Such processes are chasing the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Her absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But she apprehends that her application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. She, therefore, prays that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the learned Magistrate to Crl.M.C.No.2360/08 2 release the petitioner on bail when she appears and applies for bail. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate, the circumstances under which she 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 petitioner on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do 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]. 4. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2360/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.2360/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007