IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2831 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.103/03 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER: 8TH ACCUSED ----------------------- KULDEEP JAIN, S/O.P.C. JAIN, AGED 29, PROPRIETOR, M/S. PRAKASH FINANCE, NO.9, CHANDRAPPA MUDALI STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI - 79. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ SUB INSPECT OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2831 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.379 read with Sec.34 IPC. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that there was illegal and unlawful repossession of the vehicle in respect of which amounts were advanced by a finance establishment. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. The case is now pending as C.C.No.95/04 before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Kothamangalam, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. On the date when the case was posted for trial, the petitioner did not appear and consequently a warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. The warrant of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing the Crl.M.C. No. 2831 of 2008 -: 2 :- petitioner now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner 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, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate. 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 the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police Crl.M.C. No. 2831 of 2008 -: 3 :- (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks 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. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/