IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2273 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.17/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, THAMARASSERY .................... (C.R.NO.10/06 OF EXCISE INSPECTOR. THAMARASSERY) PETITIONER: ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- M.CHANDRIKA, W/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MOOSARIYEDATH HOUSE, MANIPURAM DESOM, PARAMBATHKAVU DESOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. EXCISE INSPECTOR, THAMARASSERY. 2. STATE REP; BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2273 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2008 ORDER The petitioner – a woman, faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.8 of the Kerala Abkari Act. The alleged incident took place on 2/6/06. The petitioner has not been arrested at any stage. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been registered. The petitioner having not entered appearance so far, coercive processes have been issued to secure the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner finds such processes chasing her. She apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent. Her absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before Crl.M.C. No. 2273 of 2008 -: 2 :- the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner 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, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release her on bail when she appears before the learned Magistrate. 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 the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate Crl.M.C. No. 2273 of 2008 -: 3 :- must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say, the application for bail will have to be considered in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22). (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/