IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 725 of 2008() ---------------------------- CMP.3265/2007 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA Cr.NO.66/04 OF KAYAMKULAM EXCISE RANGE .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED ----------------- THANKACHI, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O.BHADRAN, PRAYATTU VEEDU, PRAYAR NORTH, PUTHUPALLY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KAYAMKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.725 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. She was allegedly found to keep in her possession 140 litres of wash on 22.09.04. Investigation is now complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate. Committal proceedings has been registered. The petitioner has not been arrested so far. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against her. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. She was not the person who had kept possession of the articles in question. She is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But she apprehends that her application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. B.A.No.725 of 2008 2 3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which she could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. 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 bail application 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/-