High Court Kerala High Court

Cheruvatty Moideen vs State Of Kerala on 5 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Cheruvatty Moideen vs State Of Kerala on 5 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3419 of 2008()


1. CHERUVATTY MOIDEEN, S/O.ASSAINAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.SURENDRAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :05/09/2008

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                  Crl.M.C. No. 3419 of 2008
            -------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 5th day of September, 2008

                               ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under

Sec.379 IPC. The co-accused has already been tried, found

not guilty and acquitted. The petitioner was not available for

trial. The case against him has been split up. Coercive

processes have been issued against the petitioner by the

learned Magistrate. Such processes are chasing the petitioner

now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest in execution

of such processes.

2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent.

His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The

petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before

the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner

apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be

Crl.M.C. No. 3419 of 2008 -: 2 :-

considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance

with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that

the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the

learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears

before the learned Magistrate.

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. 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 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 – on the date of surrender itself.

Crl.M.C. No. 3419 of 2008 -: 3 :-

5. There is an interesting further prayer that there may be

a direction to dispose of the case immediately. The petitioner

must first appear before the learned Magistrate and secure bail.

Thereafter, he can certainly apply to the learned Magistrate for

an expeditious disposal of his case. On such application,

appropriate orders must be passed by the learned Magistrate.

No further directions appear to be necessary.

6. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for

the petitioner.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge

Crl.M.C. No. 3419 of 2008 -: 4 :-