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