IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4297 of 2008() ------------------------- C.C.NO.156 OF 2007 OF J.F.C.M, THALASSERRY PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- SHARMILA RAMESH, W/O.RAMESH, AGED 36 YEARS, "GALLAB"KODIYERI AMSOM, P.O.PARAL, THALASSERRY,AWD NO.4, MUNDOOR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATEO OF KERALA(SHO DHARMADAM POLICE STATION), 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 11/11/2008 ALONG WITH CRMC.NO.4299 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. Nos.4297 & 4298 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008 ORDER Petitioner, a woman, faces allegations in two separate prosecutions, both pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thalassery. It is submitted that the petitioner had entered appearance and was enlarged on bail in both the cases. But subsequently, allegedly on account of reasons beyond her control, she could not appear before the learned Magistrate. Consequently coercive processes have been issued by the learned Magistrate against the petitioner. Such processes are chasing the petitioner. She has come to this Court with these petitions praying for issue of directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C to the learned Magistrate to comply with the dictum in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339] and to consider her application for bail to be filed by her when she surrenders before the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. Crl.M.C. Nos.4297 & 4298 of 2008 2 2. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. I am not satisfied that it is necessary for this Court in every subsequent case to issue directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C to the Magistracy to follow the dictum in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police . Every court must do the same. I have no reason to assume that the same shall not be done. If there be non compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner. 3. The counsel submits that the petitioner wants to apply for exemption from her personal appearance. The petitioner can do the same. The learned Magistrate must dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. No special or more specific directions appear to be necessary. 4. These Crl.M.Cs are, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the above specific observations. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for production before the court below. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-