High Court Kerala High Court

B.Jyothir Nivas vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
B.Jyothir Nivas vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3055 of 2007()


1. B.JYOTHIR NIVAS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :04/10/2007

 O R D E R
                                R.BASANT, J
                        ------------------------------------
                       Crl.M.C.No.3055 of 2007
                        -------------------------------------
               Dated this the 4th day of October, 2007

                                  O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences

punishable, inter alia, under Section 353 I.P.C. Cognizance has been

taken. The case has been registered as C.C.No.1961 of 2004.

Consequent to non appearance of the petitioner, the case has been

transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases. Coercive steps have

been initiated against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate to

procure his presence. The petitioner finds a warrant of arrest issued

by the learned Magistrate chasing him.

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or

deliberate. He is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate.

He apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be

considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law

and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions under Section

482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner.

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.

Crl.M.C.No.3055 of 2007 2

I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not

consider such application 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 in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent

of Police [2003(1) KLT 339].

4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with

the specific observation 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 appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously –

on the date of surrender itself.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-

Crl.M.C.No.3055 of 2007 3