IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2479 of 2009 -------------------------------- CC.1679/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, THRISSUR .......................................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------------- PRASANNAKUMAR, AGED 46, S/O.SEKHARAN, THANDAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENTHRAPPINNY, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU PAUL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. P.GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 52, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, "KRISHNA KRIPA", NATTIKA P.O., TRICHUR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2479 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 29th July 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.1679/2007 on the file of Judicial first Class Magistrate-II, Thrissur. On 16/6/2009 as he was absent, learned Magistrate issued non bailable warrant and notice to the sureties to 1/8/2009. Annexure-A2 petition was filed thereafter on 25/6/2009 under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure for exemption from appearance and to conduct the case through the counsel. Learned Magistrate dismissed the petition holding that bail was cancelled and hence petitioner cannot be permitted to appear through the counsel. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for a direction to consider the application for bail on the date of surrender. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that learned Magistrate is insisting the petitioner to deposit the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. I do not believe that Magistrate will issue any such illegal CRMC 2479/2009 2 direction, to release the petitioner on bail. When bail was cancelled and non bailable warrant was issued, petitioner is not entitled to file a petition under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure without filing an application to re-call the warrant and without appearing personally before the Magistrate. Annexure-A2 petition does not disclose that petitioner sought permanent exemption under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure after undertaking that evidence could be recorded in his absence, treating presence of his counsel as his presence and he will not challenge the evidence so recorded in that proceedings or in appeal or in revision, which is mandatory to grant permanent exemption. In such circumstances, dismissal of the said petition is also justifiable. Though learned counsel expressed apprehension that application for bail will not be considered on the date of surrender, I find no reason to believe that Magistrate is unaware of the provisions of law or the decisions of this court or that Magistrate will not act in accordance with law. Hence no direction is also warranted. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.