IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2100 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.100/2004 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.695 OF 2003 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.1 ---------------------- SYAM MOHAN, S/O. MOHANAKURUP, AGED 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAVULLATHIL VEEDU, PARAKKARA MURI, PANDALAM THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT ----------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2100 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioner is the 1st accused in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 451 and 332 r/w 149 I.P.C. There are other co-accused also. Investigation is complete. Final report has been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Trial has already commenced. The petitioner did not appear before the learned Magistrate and hence the case against him has been ordered to be split up. The petitioner submits that he is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate and take part in the trial which has already commenced. He does not want any witnesses to be recalled or the clock to be set back. He is willing to participate in the trial and proceed further. But he apprehends that if he surrenders before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, 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. 2. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the Crl.M.C. No.2100 of 2008 2 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]. 3. 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 4. If the petitioner has a case that he does not want the witnesses to be recalled and it is sufficient if he is permitted to join the trial and continue with the proceedings, he can make a request to the learned Magistrate to that effect and the learned Magistrate, after hearing the Prosecutor and the counsel for the petitioner, must take appropriate decision in the matter. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C. No.2100 of 2008 3