IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 43 of 2009() ----------------------- CP.145/2001 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II,PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.52/1999 OF KOIPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED -------------------------- SANTHOSH,S/O.RAJAN,MUNJANATTU HOUSE, PURAYIDATHUMKAVU, KOIPPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, 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 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.43 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment as the 2nd accused in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 308 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal Proceedings has been registered. As the petitioner was not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter, reckoning him as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued. The case has been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail. But the learned Sessions Judge rejected the same as per Annexure-A1 order. 2. The petitioner now wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate. But he 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 therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. Crl.M.C. No.43 of 2009 2 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 such application 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 in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. 4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the specific observation 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 appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself, in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T 22]. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-