High Court Kerala High Court

Mini Baby vs Boban Varkey on 17 August, 2007

Kerala High Court
Mini Baby vs Boban Varkey on 17 August, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2625 of 2007()


1. MINI BABY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. BOBAN VARKEY, S/O. VARKEY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :17/08/2007

 O R D E R
                          R.BASANT, J.
                       ----------------------
                    Crl.M.C.No.2625 of 2007
                   ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 17th day of August 2007

                              O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Cognizance was

taken. The petitioner had allegedly appeared before the learned

Magistrate. She was enlarged on bail. From and after

09/02/2007, the petitioner was not able to appear before the

learned Magistrate. Consequently, the learned Magistrate has

issued coercive processes against the petitioner. The petitioner

finds a warrant of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate

chasing her.

2. According to the petitioner, she is absolutely innocent.

Her non-appearance was not wilful. The petitioner is willing to

surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. She

shall co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the case. But she

apprehends that her application for bail may not be considered

by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and

expeditiously. She, therefore, prays that directions under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the learned Magistrate to

release the petitioner on bail when she appears and applies for

bail.

Crl.M.C.No.2625/07 2

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

Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate, the

circumstances under which she could not earlier appear before

the learned Magistrate.

4. 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].

5. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is

dismissed but with the 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.


                                             (R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr
                  // True Copy//      PA to Judge

Crl.M.C.No.2625/07    3

Crl.M.C.No.2625/07    4

       R.BASANT, J.




         CRL.M.CNo.




            ORDER




21ST DAY OF MAY2007