High Court Kerala High Court

K.K.Krishnarajan vs State Of Kerala on 21 August, 2007

Kerala High Court
K.K.Krishnarajan vs State Of Kerala on 21 August, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 4991 of 2007()


1. K.K.KRISHNARAJAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :21/08/2007

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      Crl.M.A. No.4991 of 2007
                                           in
                      B.A.No. 4000 of 2007
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2007

                                O R D E R

In favour of the petitioner, directions under Section 438

Cr.P.C. were issued as per order dt. 9.7.2007. The petitioner was

directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate on 16.7.2007 and

to comply with the other conditions imposed in the interests of a fair,

efficient and expeditious investigation. The petitioner did not take

advantage of that order. He did not surrender before the learned

Magistrate. He did not make any request to this Court earlier for

extension of time. On 22.8.2007, he conveniently has made the

present application for a re-fixation of the schedule for appearance

and to comply with the further directions.

2. What is the reason? Why is it that the petitioner did not

appear on 16.7.2007? Why is it that he did not apply for extension in

prompt time? An omnibus explanation is offered with the help of

Annex.B dt.2.8.2007 that the petitioner was ill for the period from

10.7.07 to 2.8.07 and he was advised complete rest during this period.

Crl.M.A. No.4991 of 2007
2

The certificate and the petition do not explain why the petitioner did not

come to this court after 2.8.07 till 22.8.2007. I have reasons to assume that

the petitioner is not interested in complying with the conditions and is only

attempting to delay and protract the proceedings. The petitioner is not

entitled to any further equitable relief, he having not complied with the

direction of the court and he having not satisfactorily explained his

failure/omission to comply with the direction.

3. While granting anticipatory bail, the court alertly directs that the

petitioner must surrender before the Investigating Officer and make himself

available for interrogation. While equitable discretion is exercised in his

favour, he has also got an obligation to ensure that he co-operates with the

Investigator for the expeditious investigation. Such reckless non-

compliance with the conditions and indiscriminate prayer for extension of

time would affect the interests of a proper and expeditious investigation. I

am not persuaded to hold that there is any sufficient reason to grant

extension of time. The prayer must fail.

4. This petition is dismissed. Needless to say, the petitioner can

surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate now

and seek bail. If he surrenders, I repeat, his application for bail will have

Crl.M.A. No.4991 of 2007
3

to be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with

law and expeditiously.

(R. BASANT)
Judge

tm