High Court Kerala High Court

Vijesh @ Bichu And Another vs Sub Inspector Of Police And … on 8 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Vijesh @ Bichu And Another vs Sub Inspector Of Police And … on 8 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2549 of 2008()



1. VIJESH @ BICHU AND ANOTHER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANOTHER
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.CIBI THOMAS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :08/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  Crl.M.C.No. 2549 of 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008

                               O R D E R

The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for

offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 307 r/w.149 I.P.C.

Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed.

Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been

registered. The petitioners have not entered appearance so far.

Reckoning them as absconding, coercive processes have been

issued against them by the learned Magistrate. They apprehend

imminent arrest.

2. According to the petitioners they are absolutely

innocent. Their absence was not willful or deliberate, but on

account of reasons beyond their control. They are willing to

surrender before the learned Magistrate, but he 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

Crl.M.C.No. 2549 of 2008
2

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).

4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however

hasten to observe that if the petitioners appear before the learned

Magistrate and apply for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to

the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must

Crl.M.C.No. 2549 of 2008
3

proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say their

applicationa for bail may be considered in the light of the dictum in

Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also.

5. Hand over the order.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm