IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 733 of 2008() ---------------------------- CP.98/2003 of J.M.F.C.-I, CHENGANNUR CRIME NO.1/2000 OF VENMONY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ----------------- JOHN VARGHESE @ VINOD, AGED 36 S/O.A.G.JOHN, ATTUPURATH VEEDU VENMONY (P.O), CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI SRI.R.ANIL SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED SRI.DELVIN JACOB MATHEWS SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY P.P. SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 733 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.302 of the IPC. The petitioner, it is submitted, was not shown as an accused in the FIR. In the course of investigation, he was not arrested. He had no information or idea that he was being arrayed as an accused in the crime. When the final report was filed, it is submitted that the petitioner was shown as an absconding accused. He was arrayed as accused No.8. The case against the co-accused has been committed to the Court of Session. But as the petitioner has not appeared before the learned Magistrate, the case against him is split up and is continuing to be pending before the learned Magistrate. Reckoning the petitioner as an B.A. No. 733 OF 2008 -: 2 :- absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner. The petitioner finds such processes are chasing him now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He was not informed of and was not served with any processes conveying to him the necessity for him to appear before the police or the learned Magistrate. The 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 B.A. No. 733 OF 2008 -: 3 :- 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 bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks 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. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge