Ramachandran vs State Of Kerala on 23 May, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 656 of 2008()


1. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O. PARAMESWARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V.

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/05/2008

 O R D E R
                             R. BASANT, J.
                -----------------------------------------------
                     Crl.M.C. No. 656 OF 2008
                -----------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008

                                O R D E R

The petitioner faced indictment in a prosecution under

Section 420 read with Section 511 I.P.C. The petitioner has

already been found guilty and convicted. In appeal, the learned

Sessions Judge has sent the matter back to the learned

Magistrate for imposing sentence and to consider the applicability

of the Probation of Offenders Act. Petitioner thereafter appeared

before the learned Magistrate but subsequently he has not able to

appear before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate has

now taken coercive steps against the petitioner. The petitioner

apprehends imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence was not willful or

deliberate. His counsel had fell ill. Later he has expired also. In

these circumstances, the petitioner did not receive prompt

information about the dates of posting of the case. It is only

because of such intervening circumstances that the petitioner

Crl.M.C. No. 656 of 2008
2

could not appear before the learned Magistrate. He is now willing

to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail

But he apprehends that his application for bail may not be

considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance

with law and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays that directions

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.

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 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].

Crl.M.C. No. 656 of 2008
3

In the result, this petition 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
ttb

Crl.M.C. No. 656 of 2008
4

Crl.M.C. No. 656 of 2008
5