IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3236 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 1871/03 OF CITY TRAFFIC POLICE, KOZHIKODE AGAINST THE ORDER IN LP 135/2006 IN CP.27/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------- AJARUL ASPATH, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. KUNHIRAYIL MUNDOLI MANAPPATTIL PULLITHODI HOUSE NALLALAM P.O., CHERUVANNUR KOZHIKODE DIST,. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.JAYARAJ NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. CHANDRAN, AGED 50 YEARS S/O. SANKARAN, AUTORIKSHAW DRIVER EDAKKANDY DESOM, MAKKADA AMSOM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3236 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 308 I.P.C. Initially crime was registered under Sections 279 and 337 I.P.C., it is submitted. Later, on the basis of a report submitted by the Investigating Officer the section of offence was altered to Section 308 I.P.C. Subsequently the petitioner was enlarged on bail, it is submitted. 2. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioner was not available in India as he had gone abroad in connection with his employment. He was not served with any notice or process by the lower court, submits the learned counsel. In the committal proceedings, coercive processes have been issued against him. The case has been transferred to the list of long pending cases. The petitioner finds such processes issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. His absence was not willful or deliberate, but on account of Crl.M.C.No. 3236 of 2008 2 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 Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 3. It is certainly 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 Sessions Magistrate would not consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before the learned Magistrate 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 Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must Crl.M.C.No. 3236 of 2008 3 proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say his application for bail may be considered in the light of the dictum in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also. (R. BASANT) Judge tm