Badusha vs S.I. Of Police on 7 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2985 of 2008()


1. BADUSHA, KARUVILAKATHU VEEDU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. S.I. OF POLICE, POTHANCODE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHANAVAS.S

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :07/08/2008

 O R D E R
                         R. BASANT, J.
           -------------------------------------------------
                 Crl.M.C. No. 2985 of 2008
           -------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 7th day of August, 2008

                              ORDER

The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered

alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.326 read

with Sec.34 IPC. Investigation is not complete, it is submitted.

The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.

2. Instead of seeking anticipatory bail or surrendering

before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate

having jurisdiction, the petitioner has come to this Court with

this petition under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. According to the

petitioner, he is willing to surrender before the Investigating

Officer or the learned Magistrate and apply for regular bail.

But he apprehends that his application for regular bail may not

be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously. He therefore prays

Crl.M.C. No. 2985 of 2008 -: 2 :-

that directions under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. may be issued.

2. It is for the petitioner to surrender before the

Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek

regular bail. I have no reason to assume that the learned

Magistrate would not consider the petitioner’s application for

regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every

court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this

aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in

Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1)

KLT 339).

4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the

observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the

Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seeks 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.

Sd/-

                                         (R. BASANT, JUDGE)


Nan/

           //true copy//    P.S. to Judge

Crl.M.C. No. 2985 of 2008 -: 3 :-