IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 2938 of 2007()
1. N.V.MUHAMMED @ BAPPU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. ABBAS, S/O BUHARI,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :20/09/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Cr.M.C.Nos.2938
& 2939 of 2007
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 20th day of September, 2007
ORDER
The common petitioner in these two petitions faces indictment in
two separate prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under
Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act . The petitioner entered
appearance before the learned Magistrate and was enlarged on bail.
But the petitioner could not appear before the learned Magistrate.
Consequent to non-appearance of the petitioner, he finds coercive
processes issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him now.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is
innocent. His absence was not wilful. The petitioner is willing to
appear before the learned Magistrate and seek 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 a direction may be issued under
Section 482 Cr.P.C to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail
when he appears and applies for bail.
3. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned
Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances
Cr.M.C.No.2938 &
2939 of 2007
2
under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate.
The learned Magistrate must consider such application for bail on
merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. 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].
4. These Crl.M.Cs are, in these circumstances, dismissed, but
with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders before
the learned Magistrate and applies for regular 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.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
sj
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE