IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 855 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 878/02 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION L.P.3/07 IN SC.597/2005 of I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/A1 ----------------- SHOBY, S/O. KUTTAPPAN AGED 30 YEARS, MULLASSERRY HOUSE KODUNGA, VELLIKULANGARA P.O. THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 855 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 395 I.P.C. He was arrayed originally as the 5th accused. Cognizance has been taken. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions and he was enlarged on bail. But the petitioner could not subsequently continue to appear as he had secured employment abroad and was hence unable to appear before Court. The trial against the available co-accused has been completed. They have all been acquitted. The case against the petitioner has been split up and the same is transferred to the list of long pending cases. Coercive processes have been issued by the learned Sessions Judge against the petitioner. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. 2. According to the petitioner his absence was not willful. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner B.A.No. 855 of 2008 2 is willing to appear before the learned Judge. 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 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 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 B.A.No. 855 of 2008 3 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. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes a request that there may be a direction for expeditious trial, which could not be achieved so far because of the conduct of the petitioner. He can appear before the learned Sessions Judge and make a request to that effect. I have no reason to assume that the learned Sessions Judge would not consider the said application on merits. No specific directions appear to be necessary. (R. BASANT) Judge tm