IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3029 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.208/2006 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD CRIME NO.318/05 OF THE MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- 1. YOUSEF, S/O.MOHAMMAD, AYSHA MANZIL, SONAKAL, KODIABAIL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. 2. ABDUL RAHIM, S/O.LATE MAMUNHI, SONAKAL, KODIABAIL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. 3. NIZAMUDHEEN, S/O.ABDULLA TIMBER SUHANA MANZIL, MANNANKUZHI, KASARAGOD. 4. ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.USMAN, IQMATH MANZIL, MUNNALAGE, KASARAGOD. 5. SHAMSHEEN M.A., S/O.ABDULLA TIMBER, SUHANA MANZIL, MANNANKUZHI, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/8/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3029 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 ORDER The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.324 read with Sec.149 IPC. All offences are bailable, it is submitted. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioners were arrested and enlarged on bail at the crime state. After cognizance was taken, the petitioners had not entered appearance. Reckoning the petitioners as absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued by the learned Magistrate against the petitioners. Such processes are chasing the petitioners now. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. Crl.M.C. No. 3029 of 2008 -: 2 :- The petitioners, in these circumstances, want to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioners apprehend that their applications 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 petitioners have come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release them on bail when they appear before the learned Magistrate. 3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioners' applications 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 (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to Crl.M.C. No. 3029 of 2008 -: 3 :- 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 petitioners. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/