IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 16 of 2011() --------------------------- CC.13, 113 & 777 of 2007 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.C.PREMACHANDRAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE SANKARAN, PUTHIYA PURAYIL HOUSE, P.O.PARAL, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, (SHO, PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. T.V.BABU SURESH, S/O.CHERIYAMBU, UDUMUTHALA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA FOR R1 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(Crl.) No.16 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011. ORDER This petition is for transfer of three cases – C.C.Nos.13, 113 and 777 of 2007 from the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur to any other competent court in Kannur District. According to the petitioner/accused, he had moved applications in the said cases for joint trial but those applications were disposed of only after this Court issued a specific direction as per Annexure-A, order dated 22.02.2010. According to the learned counsel, there are circumstances warranting transfer of the cases to any other Magistrate's court in the District. It is pointed out by the learned counsel that all the three cases were posted on a day and since petitioner was not present, counsel applied for exemption in C.C.Nos.113 and 777 of 2007 but omitted to make a similar application in C.C.No.13 of 2007. Thereon bail granted in that case was cancelled and a non-bailable warrant was issued to the petitioner. This Court while disposing of Crl.M.C. 604 of 2010 by Annexure-A, order directed that it is open to the petitioner to file application to recall the non-bailable warrant issued to him. Since petitioner could not appear in C.C.Nos.113 and 777 of 2007 on account of non-bailable warrant pending against him in C.C.No.13 of 2007, bail bonds in C.C.Nos.113 and 777 of 2007 also were later cancelled. Now petitioner is under threat of arrest. Tr.P(Crl.)16/2011 2 2. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 3. Learned Sessions Judge, Thalassery refused to allow the request for transfer. I have gone through the order of learned Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge has observed that application for joint trial was disposed of by the learned Magistrate on the fifth day of Annexure-A, order and that there is no reason to transfer the cases as requested by petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and gone through Annexure-B, order of learned Sessions Judge I do not find reason to interfere with the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge. 4. So far as non-bailable warrants pending against petitioner are concerned, since I am told that the bail bonds are forfeited petitioner has to execute fresh bail bonds. But, there is no reason why one should insist on a different set of sureties in case the sureties who executed the bonds are willing to execute fresh bonds. To facilitate appearance of petitioner in the cases before learned magistrate I am inclined to direct that non-bailable warrant issued to the petitioner will stand in abeyance for some time. Resultantly this petition is disposed of in the following lines: i. Learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the cases on its merit having regard to the facts and evidence on record. Tr.P(Crl.)16/2011 3 ii. Non-bailable warrants issued to the petitioner in C.C.Nos.13, 113 and 777 of 2007 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur will stand in abeyance for a period of one month from this day or till petitioner appears in the said court and seeks regular bail. iii. In case applications for bail are preferred in the said cases, learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same as early as possible having regard to the fact that petitioner had already been granted bail and that custodial interrogation is not required since cognizance has already been taken in the respective cases. iv. It is directed that learned Magistrate need not insist for separate set of sureties to execute bail bonds and that the same sureties could execute bail bonds in case they are willing to do so. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks