IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 604 of 2007()
1. CHANDRAN NAIR.A.V.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :06/03/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.604 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of March, 2007
ORDER
The petitioner is accused No.18 in C.P.49 of 2006, where he
faces allegations, inter alia, under Section 309 read with 149 I.P.C
and Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act. The alleged incident had taken
place in 2003. After investigation, final report was filed. Cognizance
was taken. According to the petitioner, he had no knowledge about
the initiation of prosecution against him. On the ground that the
petitioner has not entered appearance, the learned Magistrate has
issued a non bailable warrant to procure the presence of the
petitioner. The petitioner hence finds the said warrant of arrest
chasing him. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned
Magistrate. All the co-accused have already entered appearance and
they have been enlarged on bail. But the petitioner apprehends that
his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned
Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. The
petitioner, in these circumstances, prays that directions under Section
482 Cr.P.C may be issued to the learned Magistrate to release him on
bail on the date of surrender itself.
2. I am not satisfied that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C
can or need be invoked. It is for the petitioner to appear before the
Crl.M.C.No.604 of 2007 2
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 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].
3. 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, unless compelling and exceptional
reasons are there.
H/O.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-