IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7925 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRIME 267/07 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2,5 & 7: ------------------------------------------------- 1. MAHAMOOD, S/O.MAYINARKARAKATH ABDULLA, AGED 40 YEARS, ALLAMKULAM, TALIPARAMBA P.O., TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. P.C. NASEER, S/O. ABDULLA, AGED 34 YEARS, PALLAKKAN CHEKKALI HOUSE,MUKKOLA, TALIPARAMBA P.O., TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. K.MUHAMMED BASHEER, S/O.K.ALI HAJI, AGED 32 YEARS, INDIAN FAMILY SHOP, TALIPARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.267/2007 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 7925 OF 2007 A ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused Nos.2, 5 and 7. They face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 436 IPC. They were not arrested in the course of investigation. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has already been taken. The learned Magistrate has issued summons to procure the presence of the petitioners. The petitioners have received summons. They appeared through counsel. The petitioners apprehend that if they apppear personally and seek regular bail, their application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on the ground that the offence is triable exclusively by the court itself. 2. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate, the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I find absolutely no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application for bail to be BA.7925/07 : 2 : filed by the petitioner on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have been issued in Alice George Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003 (1) KLT 339]. 3. In the result, this petition is dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 4. Needless to say, the application for bail must consider in the light of the decision reported in Sukumari Vs. State of Kerala [2001 (1) KLT 22]. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks