IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2008 / 3RD MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 519 of 2008() ---------------------------- CC.1137/2003 of J.M.F.C.,KOLENCHERRY .................... PETITIONERS : ------------------------ 1. K.V. RAJU, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, MANAGING PARTNER, VELAYUDHAN TRADERS, PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR, NOW RESIDING AT KANNATHUSSERIYIL HOUSE, PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR. 2. SHINE KUMAR, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, PARTNER, VELAYUDHAN TRADERS, PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR, NOW RESIDING AT KANNATHUSSERIYIL HOUSE, PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.G.PADMARAJ RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NORTH PARAVUR, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI.JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2008 ALONG WITH B.A.NO.523/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. Nos.519 & 523 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008 ORDER Applications for anticipatory bail. The petitioners face indictment in two separate prosecutions - both under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioners have not entered appearance before the learned Magistrate so far. Reckoning them as absconding accused, warrants of arrest have been issued against the petitioners. The petitioners find such warrants of arrest chasing them. 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. They have no information about the proceedings. The petitioners, in these circumstances, want to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioners apprehend that their applications for regular bail may not be B.A. Nos.519 & 523 OF 2008 -: 2 :- considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioners have come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release them on bail when they appear before the learned Magistrate. 3. It is 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 petitioners' applications for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law 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, these bail applications are dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek bail, after giving sufficient prior B.A. Nos.519 & 523 OF 2008 -: 3 :- 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