IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2008 / 10TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 510 of 2008() ---------------------------- CP.375/2007 of J.M.F.C-I,KASARAGOD Cr.No.2/07 OF BANDADKA EXCISE RANGE .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED: ------------------------- K.SAMALA, AGE 36, W/O.K.BALACHANDRAN, MALAMKADAPPU DESAM, MUNNAD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE BANDADKA EXCISE RANGE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.510 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner, a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution under the provisions of the Kerala Abkari Act. She was allegedly found to be in possession of 5 litres of arrack on 30.04.07. The petitioner has not been arrested. She had come to this Court with an application for anticipatory at the crime stage. That petition had been dismissed. But the petitioner has not so far surrendered before the court or the Investigating Officer. Investigation is now complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been registered. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been initiated against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner finds such processes chasing her. 2. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent. Her absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. She is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But she 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 therefore prayed that directions B.A.No.510 of 2008 2 under Section 438 and/or 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 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 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]. 4. This bail application 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. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.510 of 2008 3