IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4311 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.83/2003 of JUDL. MAGISTRTE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- ELSY, W/O.GEORGE, KALLUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PEECHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): STATE/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEECHI POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4311 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2008 ORDER Petitioner, a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 420 I.P.C. Cognizance was taken as early as in 1997 as can be seen from the number assigned to the case initially as C.C.No.284 of 1997. The petitioner had entered appearance and was enlarged on bail in that case. But later the petitioner did not appear before the learned Magistrate allegedly on account of her compulsion relating to her employment abroad as a housemaid. The case against the petitioner has been split up. All the co-accused have by now been tried, found not guilty and acquitted, it is submitted. Against the petitioner coercive processes have been issued by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner she is absolutely innocent. Her absence was not wilful. She is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. But she apprehends that her application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate Crl.M.C. No.4311 of 2008 2 on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 2. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339]. I am not satisfied that it is necessary for this Court in every subsequent case to issue directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C to the Magistracy to follow the dictum in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police . Every court must do the same. I have no reason to assume that the same shall not be done. If there be non compliance, the avenues of challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner. 3. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the above specific observations. 4. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for production before the court below. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-