IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3030 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.48/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KAYAMKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- ANITHA, AGED 28, W/O. PRAKASH, AMAL BAHVANAM, KADUVINAL.P.O, VALLIKUNNAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3030 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 ORDER The petitioner – a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution under the Kerala Abkari Act. She was not arrested as the detecting Excise officials did not consist of a woman official. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceeding has been registered. The petitioner has not entered appearance so far. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against her by the learned Magistrate. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent. Her husband is afflicted with cancer. Her absence Crl.M.C. No.3030 of 2008 -: 2 :- earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner apprehends that her application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release her on bail when she appears before the learned Magistrate. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which she could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to Crl.M.C. No.3030 of 2008 -: 3 :- 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. Needless to say, the application for bail will have to be considered in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22). (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/