IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1834 of 2009 ---------------------------------- CC.NO.452/2004 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- T.ASOKAN, THACHAMBALATH, REENA NIVAS, PANTHEERANKAVU P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 019. BY ADV. MR.T.G.RAJENDRAN. RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT/ STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NALLALAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.1834 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 4th June 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.452/2004 of Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode. Prosecution case against petitioner is that on 10/3/2004 at about 7.30 a.m petitioner trespassed into the house of defacto complainant and committed mischief by destroying the telephone as well as flower plots and also uttered obscene words and thereby committed offences under Sections 452, 427, 323 and 294(b) of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner was earlier released on bail. According to the petitioner due to unforeseen reason he could not appear on the date when case was posted and as a result non bailable warrant is issued and it is pending. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that in the event of surrender of the petitioner before the learned Magistrate, Magistrate may be directed to release the petitioner on bail. 3. On going through the petition and the CRMC 1834/09 2 document, I find this not a fit case to quash the proceedings as sought for. 2. The question whether the ingredients of the offence is proved or not can only be decided on the evidence to be let in. If the allegations in the final report as such are accepted it cannot be said that no offence is made out. Hence the crime cannot be quashed. When an absconding accused surrenders before the Magistrate and moves an application for bail, Magistrate is expected to pass orders in the application without delay. If the petitioner surrenders and files an application, I find no reason to believe that Magistrate will not pass orders immediately. In such circumstances, I find no reason to issue any direction as sought for. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.