IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2443 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.149 OF 2006 OF DHARMADOM POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- P.SATHEESAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, SREYAS, P.O.MAVILAI, KANNOOR. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DHARMADOM POLICE STATION, DHARMADOM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2443 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Cognizance has been taken. Crime was registered in 2006. The petitioner did not appear before the learned Magistrate. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. His case has been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases. An application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court now apprehending imminent arrest in execution of the warrant. 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 under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. Crl.M.C. No.2443 of 2008 2 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. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-