Vinu.P.R. vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 June, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1876 of 2007()


1. VINU.P.R., SON OF SHRI. RAJU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.K.SASI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/06/2007

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J.

                            ----------------------

                         Crl.M.C.No.1876 of 2007

                        ----------------------------------------

                 Dated this the  11th day of June 2007




                                   O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under

Section 8 of the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner has not

entered appearance so far. He finds a warrant of arrest issued

by the learned Magistrate chasing him. The petitioner is willing

to appear before the learned Magistrate. But he apprehends

that the learned Magistrate may not consider his application for

bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He

may not be granted bail by the learned Magistrate, it is

apprehended. In these circumstances, it is prayed that

directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C to the

learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail when he

appears or is produced before the learned Magistrate.

2. 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 find absolutely no reason to assume

Crl.M.C.No.1876/07 2

that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application

for bail to be filed by the petitioner on merits, in accordance with

law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special

or specific directions appear to be necessary. Sufficient general

directions have been issued in Alice George vs.Deputy

Superintendent of Police [2003(1)KLT 339].

3. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is

dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner

surrenders 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, in accordance with law and

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself.

Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the

petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr

Crl.M.C.No.1876/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.1876/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007