IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 358 of 2009() ------------------------ S.C.NO.568/04 OF ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-II, ERNAKULAM) CRIME NO.394/2002 OF KALADY POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.5 --------------------------- SREEJITH, S/O.SIVARAJAN, AGED 31 YRS, KALATHITHARAYIL HOUSE,PERINGALAKARA, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE REPRESENTED BY THE P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.358 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment as the 5th accused in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 395 r/w 149 I.P.C. According to the petitioner he had surrendered before the committal court and was enlarged on bail. But later he could not appear before the Sessions Court as compulsions of his employment compelled him to remain in Mumbai. The case against him has been split up. The case stands posted to 31.01.09 for scheduling trial. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. The absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. 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 - on the date of surrender itself. 2. 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 Crl.M.C. No.358 of 2009 2 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]. 3. 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. 4. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-