IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 1191 of 2008()
1. HARI, (ORIGINAL A2),
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :29/02/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
B.A. No. 1191 OF 2008 F
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces
indictment in a prosecution under section 326 IPC. He is the
2nd accused. Altogether there are three accused persons.
Final report was filed. Cognizance was taken. The petitioner
was not available for trial. The co-accused faced the trial.
They have been found guilty only under section 324 IPC. The
case against the petitioner has been split up. Coercive
processes have been issued against the petitioner. The
petitioner apprehends that he may be arrested at any
moment.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was
not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender
before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But he
BA.1191/08
: 2 :
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 438 or 482 Cr.P.C. may be
issued to the learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on
bail when he appears and applies for bail.
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 petition is dismissed but with the
BA.1191/08
: 3 :
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.
5. Needless to say, the petitioner can urge before the
learned Magistrate with the help of the judgment in the earlier
case that the allegations, even if accepted, will not amount an
offence under section 326 IPC. The earlier judgment was not
placed before me and, hence, I am unable to express any
opinion on that aspect.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
aks