IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2007 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 3345 of 2007() ------------------------- S.T.NO.1403/05 OF J.F.M.C-IV, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------ JISHORE.T.JOHN, S/O.T.V.JOHNY, THURUTHEL, KAROOR P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.SUNIL RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.3345 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2007 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance was taken as early as in 2005, as can be seen from the number assigned to the case - S.T.1403 of 2005. The petitioner had entered appearance and was enlarged on bail. But subsequently, consequent to his non appearance, a non bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner finds such warrant of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him. 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. 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. Crl.M.C.No.3345 of 2007 2 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. 5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be a direction that the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner shall not be executed till 19.11.200, the next posting date. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C.No.3345 of 2007 3