IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1462 of 2011() ------------------------- ST.21/2004 AND L.P.NO.30/2004 of FIRST ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF AND MAGISTRATE COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED. ---------------------------------- SASIKUMAR, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN, THENGUPULLY HOUSE, P.O.KARUVANNUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.RAMABHADRAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: --------------- 1. RAJAN, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, EZHAVANPARAMBIL HOUSE,P.O.IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 682 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.PIN-682031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1462 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in S.T.No.21 of 2004 and L.P.No.30 of 2004 of the court of learned First Additional Munsiff and Magistrate, Irinjalakkuda for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. According to the petitioner, the matter was settled between the parties. On account of non- appearance of petitioner the case was included in the Long Pending Register. Petitioner is prepared to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail but, he apprehends his remand. Hence this petition to withdraw the non-bailable warrant issued to the petitioner and for a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider and dispose of the application for bail on the date of petitioner filing the same. Learned counsel submitted that if petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate he is likely to be remanded for a bailable offence. 2. Question whether the non-bailable warrant issued to the petitioner is to be recalled or not is a matter which the learned Magistrate has to decide. No direction for recall of the warrant could be issued. Nor could a direction to dispose of the application for bail on the same day petitioner appears in the court be given in view of the decision in Martin v. State of Kerala (2004(2) KLT 1037). However having regard to the nature of offence, notwithstanding that the case is of the year 1999 I am inclined to grant some relief to the petitioner. Crl.MC No.1462/2011 2 Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of directing that warrant of arrest issued to the petitioner will stand in abeyance for a period of three weeks from this day or till petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate, whichever is earlier. If any application for bail is preferred by petitioner learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same as early as possible having regard to the nature of offence involved. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks