Deepu vs State Of Kerala on 3 August, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2476 of 2007()


1. DEEPU, S/O. VALSAN, AGED 25 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :03/08/2007

 O R D E R
                                 R. BASANT, J.

                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                       Crl.M.C.No.  2476  of   2007

                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                 Dated this the  3rd  day of   August, 2007


                                     O R D E R

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No. 214 of 2003,

where he faces allegations, inter alia, under Section 395 I.P.C. along

with six other accused persons. Investigation is complete. Final

report has been filed. Committal proceedings has been registered.

Committal order was passed. The petitioner could not appear before

the learned Sessions Judge after committal. The trial against the co-

accused is scheduled to take place on 6.8.2007 as S.C. 838 of 2005.

The case against the petitioner has been split up and transferred to the

list of long pending cases. The same is pending as L.P. 14 of 2007.

2. The petitioner now wants to surrender before the learned

Magistrate. He submits that 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 Magistrate and seek bail. He shall co-

operate with the Court for the expeditious disposal of the case. He

prays that his case may also be directed to be tried along with other

accused in S.C.838 of 2005. But he apprehends that his application

for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits,

Crl.M.C.No. 2476 of 2007

2

in accordance with law and expeditiously. In these circumstances it is

prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to the learned Magistrate

to release the petitioner on bail on the date of surrender itself.

3. It is certainly 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

application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before

the learned Magistrate, 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 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 orders on

merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself.

Crl.M.C.No. 2476 of 2007

3

5. I find merit in the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner

that if trial against him is also ordered to be conducted along with S.C.838

of 2005, that shall save considerable amounts of time and resources of the

Court also. As the trial is listed to 6.8.2007, I do not want to issue any

specific direction. But I expect the learned Sessions Judge to make every

endeavour to ensure that the trial against the petitioner also proceeds along

with the other accused in the same crime, if possible.

6. Hand over copy of the order.

(R. BASANT)

Judge

tm