IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2008 / 5TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 305 of 2008() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19/12/2007 IN CC 83/2007 IN CRMP.3951/2007 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- P.V.ABDUL SALAM, S/O. KUNHI MOIDEEN, RESIDING AT BISMILLAH MANZIL, A.K.G.NAGAR, MURIKKAVU, YAKKARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU RESPONDENTS: NOT PARTY/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATION HOUSING OFFICER, PALAKKAD TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.305 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of January, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who is the sole accused in Crime No.108 of 2007 of Palakkad Town South Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, for the alleged non return of unconsumed spare parts after the termination of the contract and now pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad as C.C.No.83/2007, challenges Annexure B order dated 19.12.07 refusing to excuse the absence of the petitioner before the court and issuing warrant of arrest against the petitioner. 2. The reason for dismissing the application is that the accused had gone abroad for business purpose without obtaining the prior permission of the court. If there was no such condition of obtaining prior permission while granting bail, he has no duty to obtain the prior permission of the court, since his passport had been surrendered before the court. The absence of the petitioner could have been excused, particularly since the case is yet to reach the stage of trial. Hence the petitioner is permitted to surrender before the learned Magistrate and file an Crl.M.C.No. 305 of 2008 2 application for bail within two weeks from today. In case he complies with the condition, he shall be released on bail on appropriate conditions ensuring his presence for trial. It is made clear that the learned Magistrate need not insist personal presence of the petitioner, until the case has reached the stage of trial. Sec.205 Cr.P.C can liberally be invoked by the learned Magistrate to see that accused persons are not unnecessarily harassed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj