IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2768 of 2008 ------------------------- CC.264/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONE ACCUSED ----------------------- T.ASOKAN, THACHAMBALATH, REENA NIVAS, PANTHEERANKAVU.P.O, KOZHIKODE 673019. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NALLALAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE REP;BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE ALON WITH CRMC NOS.2771&2781 OF 2008 HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING. R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.Nos.2768, 2771 and 2781 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the sole accused in three different prosecutions all pending before the same court. In two prosecutions offences alleged are bailable. In one prosecution a non-bailable offence has also been alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner had entered appearance before the learned Magistrate. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2004 in two cases and in 2006 in another. When the case was posted for trial, the petitioner did not appear before the learned Magistrate. His counsel was also not present. Application was filed through sureties to condone the absence of the petitioner and post the case to another date. The learned Magistrate did not accept the said request. Non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner. Such coercive processes are chasing the petitioner now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Crl.M.C.No.2768/08 & conn.cases 2 Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail when he 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 he 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.2768/08 & conn.cases 3 Crl.M.C.No.2768/08 & conn.cases 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008