IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4471 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CR. 93 /2002 IN CP.120/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, RANNI .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- BALAN.T.S, S/O. SADANANDAN, KOCHUVAZHAYIL, CHITTAR, SEETHATHODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINAT - STATE --------------------------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, RANNI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4471 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. He was not arrested at any stage till now. He has not appeared before the learned Magistrate. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been registered. In as much as he has not appeared before the learned Magistrate, coercive processes have been issued against him by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner finds such processes issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him. 2. 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 Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 3. It is certainly for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the Crl.M.C.No. 4471 of 2008 2 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 the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before the learned Magistrate 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe 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 orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say his application for bail may be considered in the light of the dictum in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also. (R. BASANT) Judge tm Crl.M.C.No. 4471 of 2008 3