High Court Kerala High Court

Pradeepkumar vs K.V.Joseph on 18 January, 2007

Kerala High Court
Pradeepkumar vs K.V.Joseph on 18 January, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 156 of 2007()


1. PRADEEPKUMAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.V.JOSEPH, AGED 55 YEARS,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.K.MOHANAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :18/01/2007

 O R D E R
                                     R.BASANT, J

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

                       Crl.M.C.Nos.156 & 157 of 2007

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

                   Dated this the  18th day of January, 2007


                                         ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment in two separate prosecutions

under Section 138 of the N.I Act. It is claimed that he is a leading

fireman employed in Government service. He did not appear before

the learned Magistrate and one of the cases has been transferred to

the list of Long Pending Cases by the learned Magistrate. The

petitioner finds himself in the unenviable predicament of warrants of

arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him in these cases.

The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has

valid reason to explain his inability to appear before the learned

Magistrate earlier. He apprehends that his application for bail may

not be considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously

by the learned Magistrate. He has hence come to this Court with a

prayer that direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued to the

learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail when he appears

and applies for bail. It is further prayed that appropriate directions

may be issued to ensure that the petitioner is not arrested.

2. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate

would not consider the petitioner’s application for regular bail on

Crl.M.C.Nos.156 & 157 of 2007 2

merits and 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 in

Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1)

KLT 339]. The petitioner must immediately surrender before the

learned Magistrate and apply for bail.

3. These Crl.M.Cs are, in these circumstances, dismissed.

But with the specific observation that if the petitioner appears before

the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, the learned Magistrate

must consider such application for bail on merits, in accordance with

law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself, unless there

are compelling reasons.

4. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for

the petitioner for production before the learned Magistrate.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-