High Court Kerala High Court

Felix Joseph vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 18 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
Felix Joseph vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 18 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3208 of 2007()


1. FELIX JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, NELLICKAL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. SUNNY KURIAKOSE, CHAKKUMKULAM,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.J.THOMAS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :18/10/2007

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                     Crl.M.C.No.3208 of 2007
                    ----------------------------------------
              Dated this the 18th day of October 2007

                               O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Cognizance was taken as early as in 2003. The petitioner had

entered appearance. He was enlarged on bail. But

subsequently, consequent to his non-appearance, warrant of

arrest has been issued by the learned Magistrate against the

petitioner and the case against him has been transferred to the

list of long pending cases.

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

His absence was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is

willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek

regular bail. But he apprehends that his application for bail may

not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays

that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the

learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail when he

appears and applies for bail.

Crl.M.C.No.3208/07 2

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 find absolutely no reason to assume

that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application

for bail to be filed by the petitioner on merits, in accordance with

law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No

special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Sufficient

general directions have been issued in Alice George vs. Deputy

Superintendent of Police [2003(1)KLT 339].

4. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is

dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner

surrenders 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, in accordance with law and

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3208/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.3208/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007