IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 7641 of 2007()
1. NAVAS, S/O.MOIDEEN, KODENDAKARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :05/12/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
B.A. No. 7641 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of December, 2007
ORDER
The petitioner is the 9th accused. He, along with the co-
accused, faces indictment for allegedly committing the
offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.302 of the IPC. The
case against the co-accused was committed. They have
already been tried, found not guilty and acquitted, it is
submitted. The petitioner did not appear before the committal
court. His case was not hence committed to the Court of
Session. The same was pending as committal proceedings.
Consequent to the non-appearance of the petitioner, the same
has now been transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases.
Coercive processes issued by the learned Magistrate are
chasing the petitioner now.
2. The petitioner submits that he is absolutely innocent.
B.A. No. 7641 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He had
secured employment abroad and did not know the proceedings
initiated against him. He is willing to surrender before the
learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But he apprehends
that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the
learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and
expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner
has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate
to release him on bail when he appears before the learned
Magistrate.
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 have no reason to assume that the
learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioner’s
application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law
and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to
be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general
directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision
reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police
(2003 (1) KLT 339).
4. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with
B.A. No. 7641 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the
learned Magistrate and seeks 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
and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
