High Court Kerala High Court

Muneer vs State Of Kerala on 25 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Muneer vs State Of Kerala on 25 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4549 of 2008()



1. MUNEER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.MUHAMMED SALAHUDHEEN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :25/11/2008

 O R D E R
                         R. BASANT, J.
           -------------------------------------------------
                 Crl.M.C. No. 4549 of 2008
           -------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 25th day of November, 2008

                              ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment as the 2nd accused in a

prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.308

read with Sec.149 IPC. The petitioner was enlarged on bail at

the crime stage. Later he went abroad. Investigation is now

complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance

has been taken. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding

accused, the case against him has been transferred to the list

of Long Pending Cases. Coercive processes have been issued

against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate to procure his

presence. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in

execution of such processes.

2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent.

His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner

Crl.M.C. No. 4549 of 2008 -: 2 :-

has a further case that the parties have settled all their disputes

including the case and counter case. The petitioner, in these

circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate

and seek regular bail. 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.

It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this

Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on

bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate.

3. 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 have no reason to assume that the

learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioner’s

application 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, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the

observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned

Crl.M.C. No. 4549 of 2008 -: 3 :-

Magistrate and seeks 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. Needless to say,

the application for bail will have to be considered in the light of

the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22).

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/