IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 287 of 2009() ---------------------------------- S.C. NO.933/2005 OF IIND ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR. CRIME NO.225/02 OF THE VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION. ........ PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- FASALU @ FASALUDHEEN, S/O.SAIDUMUHAMMAD, KOPRA HOUSE, THIRUVATHRA, BABY ROAD, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): STATE ----------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2009, ALONG WITH CRMC NO.288 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.Nos. 287 & 288 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of January, 2009 O R D E R The common petitioner in these petitions faces indictment in two sessions cases, both pending before the IInd Addl. Sessions Court, Trichur. The petitioner has entered appearance in those case and was enlarged on bail. It is submitted that he was promptly appearing before the Sessions Court on all dates of posting. But unfortunately when the cases were posted on 2.2.08 and 8.2.2008 he could not appear. He could not inform his counsel also. Consequently reckoning him as unjustifiably absent the learned Sessions Judge has issued coercive processes against the petitioner. The petitioner finds such coercive processes issued by the learned Sessions Judge chasing him. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. It is not a case where he is voluntarily or deliberately absent. He was taken into custody by the police under the Kerala Anti-Social Activity (Prevention) Act Crl.M.C.Nos. 287 & 288 of 2009 2 on 18.10.2007. He was in custody and his movements were restricted. Hence he could not appear before the learned Sessions Judge on the date of posting of the respective cases. His absence was not wilful, but was due to reasons beyond his control. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Judge on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is in these circumstances prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to release the petitioner on bail on the date of surrender itself. 3. It is certainly for the petitioner to appear before the learned Sessions Judge and explain to the learned Judge the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Judge. I have no reason to assume that the learned Sessions Judge would not consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before the learned Judge, 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 Crl.M.C.Nos. 287 & 288 of 2009 3 have already been issued by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Sessions Judge and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Judge must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case there shall be a direction that the warrants of arrest issued against the petitioner shall not be executed till 31.1.2009. On or before that date the petitioner shall surrender before the learned Judge and seek regular bail. 6. Hand over the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm