IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4611 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN SC 719/2006 IN LP.6/2008 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, KOLLAM .................... (CRIME NO.340/2002 OF SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SHAJI, S/O.JAMAL, KANDATHIL VEEDU, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SASTHAMCOTTA THROUGH 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 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4611 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 395 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him has been split up and has been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Sessions Judge. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. He is willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Sessions Judge and seek regular bail. But he apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Sessions Judge on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to the learned Sessions Judge to consider his bail application expeditiously in the light of the decision in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. Crl.M.C. No.4611 of 2008 2 3. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339] to oblige the subordinate courts to consider applications for bail filed by accused who surrender before the courts below as expeditiously as possible. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary in the facts and circumstances of this case. I have no reason to assume that the same shall not be done. Every court must do the same. If there be non compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner. 4. Of course there is a contention that the prosecution is liable to be quashed. But at the stage of arguments, only the formal contention is urged. 5. Finally the counsel makes an interesting request that the case may be directed to be disposed of expeditiously. I said interesting because the matter has been waiting for the appearance of the petitioner who has not made himself available. Be that as it may, if the petitioner makes an appropriate request to expeditiously dispose of the case before the learned Sessions Judge, the request must be appropriately considered by the learned Sessions Judge. Crl.M.C. No.4611 of 2008 3 6. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the above specific observations. 7. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for production before the court below. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-