Kuruvila Abraham @ Aniyachan vs T.Rajendran Nair on 4 July, 2007

0
115
Kerala High Court
Kuruvila Abraham @ Aniyachan vs T.Rajendran Nair on 4 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2138 of 2007()


1. KURUVILA ABRAHAM @ ANIYACHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. T.RAJENDRAN NAIR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :04/07/2007

 O R D E R
                                    R. BASANT, J.

                     - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                      Crl.M.C.Nos.  2138 & 2139 of   2007

                      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                     Dated this the   4th   day of   July, 2007


                                        O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in two different prosecutions,

both under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, but initiated by different

complainants. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioner did not

appear before the learned Magistrate in either case. According to the

petitioner he had no knowledge of the proceeding. But reckoning

him as an absconding accused, the learned Magistrate has issued

coercive processes against the petitioner and has transferred the case

to the list of long pending cases. According to the petitioner he is

absolutely innocent. Her absence was not willful and deliberate.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is willing to appear before the learned Magistrate. But he

apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the

learned Magistrate 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.

Crl.M.C.Nos. 2138 & 2139 of 2007

2

3. It is certainly 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

application for bail to be filed by the petitioner when he surrenders before

the learned Magistrate, 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 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 orders on

merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself.






                                                                  (R. BASANT)

tm                                                                      Judge


Crl.M.C.Nos.  2138 & 2139 of   2007

                                       3


tm


LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *