High Court Kerala High Court

Girija vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 7 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Girija vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 7 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4235 of 2008()


1. GIRIJA, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. NARAYANAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :07/11/2008

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                  Crl.M.C. No. 4235 of 2008
            -------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008

                               ORDER

The petitioner – a woman, faces allegations in a crime

registered alleging commission of the offence punishable

under Sec.55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act. Investigation is in

progress. The petitioner has not been arrested. The

petitioner has not sought anticipatory bail from any court, it is

submitted. 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.

Crl.M.C. No. 4235 of 2008 -: 2 :-

2. 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).

3. 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.

Sd/-

                                        (R. BASANT, JUDGE)


Nan/

                 //true copy//         P.S. to Judge

Crl.M.C. No. 4235 of 2008 -: 3 :-