IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4038 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.55/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, MANANTHAwADY .................... PETITIONER(S): 3RD ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------- CHANDRAN, AGED 51 YEARS, VETTIKKAL HOUSE, ARANAPPARA, P.O.THOLPETTY, THIRUNELLY, WAYANADU. BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): 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 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4038 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of October, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner, who faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act; who has mot been arrested or released on bail so far; against whom a summons was issued by the learned Magistrate after cognizance was taken; who appeared before the learned Magistrate through counsel and filed an application to excuse his absence; whose application for such absence has been dismissed and coercive processes issued against him and who apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes, has now come to this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that direction may be issued to the learned Magistrate to ensure that the dicta in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339) and Sreekumar v. State of Kerala (2008 (3) KLT 748) are complied with and that the petitioner's application for regular bail is considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. Crl.M.C.No. 4038 of 2008 2 2. I am not persuaded to agree that any special or specific direction deserves to be issued. Sufficient general directions have already been issued by this Court in the decisions referred above. I am not satisfied that any special or separate direction deserves to be issued in each case to the learned Magistrate to comply with the directions issued. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate shall not follow the decisions referred above. If there be non-compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available to the petitioner. 4. This application is dismissed, but with the above specific observations. (R. BASANT) Judge tm