IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2914 of 2008()
1. SHAJI, THATTUPURAKKAL HOUSE, VENMONY
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :31/07/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 2914 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner faces indictment as the third accused in a
prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the
Kerala Abkari Act. He was not arrested in the course of
investigation. Investigation is complete. Final report has already
been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings
has been registered. He has not appeared before the learned
Magistrate. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused,
coercive processes have been issued against him. The petitioner
finds such processes issued by the learned Magistrate chasing
him.
2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent.
His absence was not willful or deliberate, but on account of
reasons beyond his control. He is willing to surrender before the
learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that his application for
Crl.M.C.No. 2914 of 2008
2
bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in
accordance with law and expeditiously.
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 Sessions 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. Needless to say his
Crl.M.C.No. 2914 of 2008
3
application for bail may be considered in the light of the dictum in
Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also.
5. Hand over the order.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm