High Court Kerala High Court

Shajahan vs State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
Shajahan vs State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3464 of 2007()


1. SHAJAHAN, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ALI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :16/11/2007

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  Crl.M.C.No. 3464 of 2007
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 16th day of November, 2007

                               O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the

offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. Investigation is now

complete. Final report has been filed. Sessions case has been

registered. Co-accused have been tried, found not guilty and

acquitted. The petitioner was not available for trial before the

learned Sessions Judge. The case against him has been split up

and later been transferred to the list of long pending cases. The

warrant of arrest issued by the learned Sessions Judge is chasing

the petitioner. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has

come to this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C

2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent.

His failure/omission to appear earlier was not wilful, but was due

to reasons beyond his control. He is willing to surrender before

the learned Sessions Judge and seek bail. But he apprehends

Crl.M.C.No. 3464 of 2007
2

that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned

Judge on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. In these

circumstances it is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued

to the learned Sessions Judge to release the petitioner on bail on the

date of surrender itself.

3. It is certainly for the petitioner to appear before the learned

Sessions Judge and explain to the learned Judge the circumstances

under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Judge. I

have no reason to assume that the learned Sessions Judge would not

consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he

surrenders before the learned Judge, 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George

v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339).

4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however

hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned

Sessions Judge and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior

Crl.M.C.No. 3464 of 2007
3

notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Judge

must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm