IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2237 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23/07/2004 IN L.P.C.68/2007 IN CC.527/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR CRIME NO.127/01 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: 2ND ACCUSED ----------------------- RASHEED MUKRI, S/O.KUTTY, AGED 27 YEARS, KARAYIL, P.O.ANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING THE S.H.O. PAYYANNUR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2237 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 324 I.P.C. All offences alleged are compoundable, it is submitted. In so far as the co- accused are concerned, already the matter has been settled and has been compounded and the composition has been accepted by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner was abroad. Therefore he had not appeared before the learned Magistrate. Assuming that the personal presence of the petitioner is essential to work out a composition, no application for composition was filed before the learned Magistrate. Hence while acquitting the others accepting the composition, the learned Magistrate split up the case against the petitioner. The same has now been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. Crl.M.C. No.2237 of 2008 2 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But he apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 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 such application on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. Crl.M.C. No.2237 of 2008 3 4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the specific observation that if the petitioner appears 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner has already settled the dispute with the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant, who is competent to compound the offence, has already compounded the offence. If on the date of appearance the defacto complainant also appears and reports to the court that the composition has already been effected, I need only mention that I expect the learned Magistrate to dispose of such prayer for composition also expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-