IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 345 of 2009() ------------------------ C.P.NO.62/2007 IN CRIME NO.86/95 OF CHENGAMANAD POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 --------------------------- FAIZAL, S/O.MUHAMMEDALI,AGED 36 YRS, KUNNATH HOUSE, PALAPRASSERY,CHENGAMANAD.P.O, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALR REP.BY ITS P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.345 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 307 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal Proceedings has been registered. The petitioner was not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter. All the co-accused appeared before the learned Magistrate. They were committed to the Court of Session and the cases against them have now ended in acquittal consequent to hostility of the witnesses. The petitioner was not available. The case against him was split up. It is refiled as C.P.No.62 of 2007. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against him by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of such processes. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. But he apprehends that his 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 Crl.M.C. No.345 of 2009 2 under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 3. 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 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 Crl.M.C 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself, in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T 22]. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) Crl.M.C. No.345 of 2009 3 rtr/-