IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2642 of 2008() ------------------------- STC.1315/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SANTHOSH MATHEW, S/O.ABRAHAM MATHEW URUMBITHADATHIL HOUSE, KUDIYANMALA PO., KANNUR BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOSEPH SRI.K.K.MOIDEEN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KRISHNA BHAKTHAR, S/O.LAKSHMANA, 50 YEARS, PO., KAKKAD, POOZHATHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY P.P. SRIL. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2642 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance was taken in 2005. The petitioner was not available. A warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner. He had surrendered before the learned Magistrate. He was enlarged on bail. Later when the case was posted on 25/4/08, the petitioner was not present. He was allegedly laid up. He appeared through counsel. But the learned Magistrate has issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner. Such coercive processes are now chasing the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The Crl.M.C. No. 2642 of 2008 -: 2 :- petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner 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, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate. 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 the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to Crl.M.C. No. 2642 of 2008 -: 3 :- the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/