Rineesh vs State Of Kerala on 31 October, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4119 of 2008()



1. RINEESH
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR (KALLESSERIL)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :31/10/2008

 O R D E R
                             R. BASANT, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   Crl.M.C.No. 4119 of 2008
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008

                                O R D E R

The petitioners face indictment as accused 4 and 5 in a

crime alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 395

I.P.C. One of the petitioners was released on bail at the crime

stage, but the other has not been arrested and released on bail

so far. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has

been registered. The petitioners have not appeared before the

learned Magistrate and their non-appearance is allegedly on

account of the fact that no notice, process or summons of the

court had ever been served on them. Coercive processes have

been issued against them by the learned Magistrate. They

apprehend imminent arrest. They have come to this court with

this petition for issue of a direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to

direct the Magistrate to consider their bail applications on

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

surrender itself, in accordance with the dicta in Alice George v.

Crl.M.C.No. 4119 of 2008
2

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

Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22).

2. I am not persuaded to agree that any special or specific

direction deserves to be issued. Sufficient general directions have

already been issued by this Court in the decisions referred above. It is

not necessary for this Court to issue directions under Section 482

Cr.P.C. to the Magistrate to comply with the directions issued already.

Every court must do the same. If there be non-compliance, the avenues

of challenge/complaint are available to the petitioners.

4. This application is accordingly dismissed, but with the above

specific observations.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm