High Court Kerala High Court

Suresh Kumar @ Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 1 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
Suresh Kumar @ Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 1 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3333 of 2007()


1. SURESH KUMAR @ SURESH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.VINOD

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :01/11/2007

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                    Crl.M.C.Nos.3333 of 2007
                    ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 1st day of November 2007


                               O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for

offences punishable under Section 435 and 324 read with 34

I.P.C. Though co-accused faced trial, he was found not guilty

and acquitted. The petitioner was not available for trial. The

case against him stands transferred to the list of long pending

cases. Coercive processes has been issued against the

petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was

not wilful or deliberate but was on account of reasons beyond his

control. 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 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.

Crl.M.C.No.3333/07 2

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.3333/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.3333/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007