IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3657 of 2011() ------------------------------- CC.341/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------ ERSHAD, S/O.PAREETH, VATTAKUNNNEL HOUSE, RAMAMANALAM KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.GEO PAUL SRI.SANU MATHEW SRI.C.R.PRAMOD SRI.S.ASHOK KUMAR. SRI.NOEL JOSEPH SRI.M.B.SANDEEP SRI.K.V.REJANISH RESPONDENT(S): STATE ----------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR, MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682 031.. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs CRMC. NO. 3657/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1:COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. NO.341/2008 ON THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - 1, MUVATTUPUZHA. ANNEXURE A2:COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.341/2008 ON THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - 1, MUVATTUPUZHA. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3657 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2011 Order The petitioner is the accused in CC No.341 of 2008 on the file of JFCM Court-I, Muvattupuzha. He did not appear before the court till this date nor did he file application for bail. An Advocate was appearing for the petitioner. Therefore, the plea that the accused was unaware of the next posting date of the case cannot be entertained. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some amounts were due to certain persons by his father and after the death of his father, he could not settle the accounts by paying the amounts to those persons and so he had to leave the native place and that was why he could not appear before the Magistrate Court. Recently some properties were disposed of by the petitioner and started to repay the amounts to the persons who were entitled to get money from his father. This case has nothing to do with those matters. However, it is a reason for non- appearance before the court for the last three years. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is now ready to surrender Crl.M.C.3657/11 2 before the learned Magistrate. The request is that the learned Magistrate may be directed to dispose of the bail application on the same day. Such a direction cannot be issued in the light of the Division Bench decision of this court in Martin v. State of Kerala (2004(2) KLT 1037). But the Division Bench has held that the Magistrate Courts are to dispose of the bail applications as expeditiously as possible. The offences alleged against the petitioner are only under Sections 341, 324 and 506(i) IPC which are bailable offences. The accused will surrender before the learned Magistrate within ten days from today. When bail application is filed on his behalf, the same shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.3657/11 3 Crl.M.C.3657/11 4