High Court Kerala High Court

Rabiath vs State Of Kerala on 9 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
Rabiath vs State Of Kerala on 9 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 117 of 2009()



1. RABIATH
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :09/01/2009

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                  Crl.M.C. No. 117 of 2009
            -------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 9th day of January, 2009

                               ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for

offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.308 IPC. The alleged

incident took place as late as on 26/11/08. Apprehending

vexatious arrest, the petitioner applied for anticipatory bail.

To the shock of the petitioner, he learnt that investigation is

already complete and the final report has already been filed in

Crime No.917/08. The anticipatory bail application was

accordingly dismissed. The petitioner now apprehends that he

may be arrested.

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

His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The

petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before

the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner

Crl.M.C. No. 117 of 2009

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 Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with 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

Crl.M.C. No. 117 of 2009

expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself. Needless to say,

the application for bail will have to be considered in the light of

the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22).

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

the petitioner.

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/