IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1971 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.242/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PERAMBRA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN NAIR, MENHANNIAM AMSOM, KOILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 1971 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution, inter alia, under Section 326 I.P.C. The petitioner was not available for trial. The co-accused stood trial. They have been found not guilty and acquitted. The matter stands settled between the accused and the defacto complainant. As the petitioner was not available for trial, he could not claim acquittal along with the co- accused. Consequent to his non-appearance coercive processes have been issued against him. The petitioner finds such processes issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him. 2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. His absence was not willful or deliberate, but on account of reasons beyond his control. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is in these Crl.M.C.No. 1971 of 2008 2 circumstances prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to release the petitioner on bail on the date of surrender itself. 3. It is certainly 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 Sessions 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. Crl.M.C.No. 1971 of 2008 3 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is employed abroad. He is returning to India for his annual leave. As the matter is settled, the counsel prays that there may be a direction for expeditious disposal. The petitioner can appear before the learned Magistrate and seek expeditious disposal. If the matter is really settled as contended by the petitioner, I need only observe that a sense of expedition must be shown by the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case. (R. BASANT) Judge tm