High Court Kerala High Court

Jayamol P.Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2007

Kerala High Court
Jayamol P.Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3663 of 2007()


1. JAYAMOL P.THOMAS, PUTHUVELIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :10/12/2007

 O R D E R
                                R. BASANT, J.

                  ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

                         Crl.M.C. No. 3663 OF 2007

                  ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

               Dated this the 10th day of December, 2007


                                    O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The

petitioner was not available in India, it is submitted.

Consequently, after taking cognizance, on account of non-

availability of the petitioner, the case against the petitioner

has been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases and

coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was

not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender

before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But he

apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered

by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law

and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays that directions under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the learned Magistrate

to release the petitioner on bail when he appears and applies

for bail.

CRMC.3663/07

: 2 :

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 find absolutely no reason to assume

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].

4. 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.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

aks