IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2536 of 2008() ------------------------- CP.254/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOTTARAKKARA CRIME NO.162/06 OF POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, VIJAYA MANDIRAM, MALAYIL MURI, VELIYAM VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2536 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.8(2) of the Kerala Abkari Act. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate. Committal proceedings has been registered. The learned Magistrate, it is submitted at the Bar, has issued a summons to the petitioner under Sec.204 Cr.P.C. after taking cognizance. The petitioner was not arrested and released on bail at the crime stage. The petitioner has entered appearance through a counsel before the court below and the case now stands posted for his appearance to 10/7/08. 2. The petitioner is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate; but the petitioner apprehends that his application Crl.M.C. No.2536 of 2008 -: 2 :- for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law, expeditiously and favourably. It is, in these circumstances, that he has come before this Court with a prayer that appropriate directions may be issued to the learned Magistrate to consider his bail application on merits, in accordance with law, expeditiously and favourably. 3. I fail to understand the apprehension of the petitioner. The learned Magistrate must have taken cognizance of the offence and has, I must reckon, advisedly chosen to issue only a summons against the petitioner. The petitioner can now appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The learned Magistrate must consider such application for regular bail conscious of the fact that the discretion under Sec.204 Cr.P.C. has already been exercised in favour of the petitioner in issuing only a summons and not a warrant. Such application for bail, needless to say, must be considered expeditiously. 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). The application will also have to be considered in the light of the dictum in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22). In these circumstances, I am satisfied that no further or more specific Crl.M.C. No.2536 of 2008 -: 3 :- directions deserve to be issued. 4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. 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. Such application must be considered conscious of the fact that the discretion under Sec.204 Cr.P.C. has already been exercised to issue only a summons. Needless to say, the application for bail will have to be considered in the light of the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No.2536 of 2008 -: 4 :-