T.A. Baraham vs State Of Kerala on 13 February, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 580 of 2009()


1. T.A. BARAHAM, AGED 39,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. NISH M. JOHN, AGED 34,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BIJU HARIHARAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :13/02/2009

 O R D E R
                       M.N. KRISHNAN, J
                       -----------------------
                  CRL.M.C.No. 580 OF 2009
                  ---------------------------------
            Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009


                            O R D E R

This application is filed to quash Annexure A1 order by

which bail bond of the accused has been cancelled and notice has

been issued to the sureties. It is submitted that on account of

the engagement of the lawyer before this court the counsel

entrusted to represent the case was not able to be present before

the court on account of a traffic jam. The proceedings paper

were produced before this court which would equally show that

complainant is also not at all eager to have a disposal of the

matter and the court has been forced to issue even a non bailable

warrant against prosecution witness. I am informed that the

accused were permanently exempted from appearing, but the

court was forced to cancel the bond when there was no

appearance by the counsel even. Now the concerned advocate

has given sufficient reason for his absence on that particular date

and he has also stated that there is no intention to deliberately

stay away from the court especially when the court has been

Crl.M.C. 580/2009
-2-

considerate in permanently exempting the accused from personal

appearance. For the unavoidable absence of the lawyer, the

petitioner need not to be put to hardship.

2. Therefore I set aside the proceedings dated 10.12.2008

and direct the court to recall the non bailable warrant. In order

to meet the ends of justice, if possible, atleast one of the accused

shall be directed to be present through the learned counsel for

the accused on one day and thereafter the said permanent

exemption will continue and the counsel appearing for the

accused should be more vigilant in making proper representation

before the court.

With these observations the Crl.M.C is disposed of.

M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE

vkm