IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2205 of 2008()
1. GIREESH KUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :12/06/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 2205 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008
ORDER
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for
offences punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. The crime
was registered long back. Investigation was completed and
the final report was filed. Cognizance was taken and the
committal proceeding was registered in the year 2002. The
petitioner was not available. The case against him was split
up and transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases in 2003.
The petitioner is the sole accused in the case. The petitioner
has not entered appearance so far. Coercive processes have
been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate.
The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution of
such processes.
2. The petitioner had moved the learned Sessions Judge
Crl.M.C. No. 2205 of 2008 -: 2 :-
for anticipatory bail. The same was turned down by Annexure-
A1 order. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent.
His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. 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).
Crl.M.C. No. 2205 of 2008 -: 3 :-
4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the
observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned
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).
sD/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge