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. 573 of 2008() ---------------------------- CC.333/2003 of J.M.F.C.,THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ 1. ANEESH @ MUHAMMED SALI, KOROTTE VEEDU, KOTTANGAL VILLAGE. 2. NAUSHAD, VANCHIKAPPARATHADATHIL, KOTTANGAL VILLAGE. 3. SHAFEEQ, VALUVATTICKAL VEEDU, KOTTANGAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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. 573 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution, inter alia, under Section 427 r/w. 149 I.P.C. All offences are bailable, it is submitted. Investigation is now complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioners have entered appearance and were enlarged on bail. But later they were not available to be proceeded with. Some of the co-accused have already been tried, found not guilty and acquitted. But the case against the petitioners have been split up. Reckoning them as absconding, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioners. They apprehend imminent arrest. They have hence come to this court with this application for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the petitioners their absence was not willful. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to appear before the learned Magistrate. B.A.No. 573 of 2008 2 But they apprehend that their applications for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is in these circumstances prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to release the petitioners on bail on the date of surrender itself. 3. It is certainly for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the applications for bail to be filed by the petitioners when they surrender before the learned Magistrate, 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339). 3. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioners appear before the learned B.A.No. 573 of 2008 3 Magistrate and apply for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. (R. BASANT) Judge tm