IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2007 / 27TH BHADRA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 2897 of 2007() ------------------------- CC.1390/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED IN C.C.NO.1390/05 ------------ T.K.SURESH,AGED 46,THEKETHARA VEEDU, PUTHOOR P.O,THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.AJITH MURALI SMT.R.BEENA RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.2897 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18 th day of September, 2007 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The matter was referred to the Lok Adalat, it is submitted. The dispute could not be settled at the Lok Adalat. When the matter came up before the learned Magistrate on the next date of posting, the petitioner was absent. Accordingly a warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner finds such warrant of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and and seek regular bail. But the petitioner apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. In these circumstances it is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued under Sections 438 and/or 482 Cr.P.C. 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. Crl.M.C.No.2897 of 2007 2 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 Crl.M.C 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/- Crl.M.C.No.2897 of 2007 3