IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2007 / 12TH SRAVANA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 2479 of 2007() ------------------------- CC.1769/1999 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (E & O),ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- MOHAMMED BASHEER PAKKADA, S/O ABDULLA, PAKKADA HOUSE, KANNATTIPADI. PO, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AIR CUSTOMS, KARIPUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.2479 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2007 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution, inter alia, under Section 135 of the Customs Act. The petitioner had entered appearance and has taken part in the proceedings. 313 statement has already been recorded. Subsequently because of the absence of the petitioner, non bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner. 2. According to the petitioner, his absence was not wilful and it was due to reasons beyond his control. The petitioner is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail and co- operate with the court for expeditious disposal of the case. The petitioner apprehends that his application for 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. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not Crl.M.C.No.2479 of 2007 2 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. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- //True Copy // PA to Judge Crl.M.C.No.2479 of 2007 3