High Court Kerala High Court

Hamza @ Baputty vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Hamza @ Baputty vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2894 of 2008()



1. HAMZA @ BAPUTTY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :30/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  Crl.M.C.No. 2894 of 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
              Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008

                               O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the

offence punishable under Section 489 B & C I.P.C. The crime

was registered in 2001. The case was committed to the Court of

Sessions and was numbered as S.C.No.778 of 2005. The

petitioner did allegedly appear before the learned Sessions Judge

and was enlarged on bail. But later he secured employment

abroad and hence not able to appear before the learned Judge.

Reckoning him as absconding, coercive processes have been

issued against the petitioner. The petitioner finds such coercive

processes issued by the learned Sessions Judge chasing him. He

apprehends imminent arrest.

2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent.

His failure/omission to appear earlier was not wilful, but was due

to reasons beyond his control. He is willing to surrender before

the learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that his application for

Crl.M.C.No. 2894 of 2008
2

bail may not be considered by the learned Judge on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously. It is in these circumstances

prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to release the

petitioner on bail on the date of surrender itself.

3. It is certainly for the petitioner to appear before the learned

Sessions Judge and explain to the learned Judge the circumstances

under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Judge. I

have no reason to assume that the learned Sessions Judge would not

consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he

surrenders before the learned Judge, 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George

v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339).

4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however

hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned

Sessions Judge and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior

notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Judge

Crl.M.C.No. 2894 of 2008
3

must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm