IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2849 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.94/08 OF THE KADAKKAL POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ------------ 1. ARUN, INDEEVARAM, ALTHARA MOODU,KADAKKAL KOTTARAKKARA. 2. SHAJI, PRABHU VILASOM, PULLUPANA P.O. KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA. 3. BIJU, KUZHIYIL VEEDU PULLUPANA, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA BY ADV. SRI.V.PREMCHAND RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2849 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.304A read with Sec.34 IPC. There are other co-accused also. The petitioners were not arrested at the crime stage. Final report has been filed. Cognizance has already been taken. Committal proceedings has been registered. The petitioners have not entered appearance so far. Reckoning the petitioners as absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate to secure the presence of the petitioners. Such processes are chasing the petitioners now. The petitioners apprehend arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely Crl.M.C. No. 2849 of 2008 -: 2 :- innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioners, in these circumstances, want to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioners apprehend that their applications 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 petitioners have come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release them on bail when they appear before the learned Magistrate. 3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioners' applications 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 petitioners surrender before the learned Crl.M.C. No. 2849 of 2008 -: 3 :- Magistrate and seek 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. Needless to say, the applications 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/