IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2007 of 2008()
1. P.K.MATHAI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.KURIAKOSE PETER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :23/05/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2007 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. When the matter stood
posted for judgment on 29/03/2008, the petitioner did not appear.
On that day and subsequent dates to which the case was posted by
the learned Magistrate, the petitioner did not appear. Coercive
processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned
Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been dutifully appearing before the court on all
previous dates of posting. It is only because he was not well and
the case was posted in quick succession two near dates by the
learned Magistrate, he could not appear before the learned
Magistrate on 29/3/2008 and thereafter. 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
Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 2
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.
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.
Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 3
Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 4
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007