Salim Lal vs State Of Kerala on 23 January, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 365 of 2009()



1. SALIM LAL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/01/2009

 O R D E R
                           R. BASANT, J.
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   Crl.M.C.No. 365 of 2009
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009

                              O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the

offence punishable under Section 333 r/w. 34 I.P.C. He is the

first accused. According to him he is absolutely innocent. The

petitioner was not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter.

Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed.

Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings has been

registered. The learned Magistrate has issued summons under

Section 204 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. He is willing to

appear before the learned Magistrate. But he apprehends that

when he appears in response to the summons issued, the learned

Magistrate may not consider his application on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously, The fact that the offence

alleged is a sessions case may persuade the learned Judge,

notwithstanding the fact that he has initially issued a summons

only under Section 204 Cr.P.C., to remand the petitioner to

custody.

Crl.M.C.No. 365 of 2009
2

2. I find no merit whatsoever in the apprehension of the

petitioner. Only a summons has been issued to the petitioner and in

tune with the decision in Sreekumar v. State of Kerala (2008 (3)

KLT 748) the petitioner can claim bail before the learned Magistrate. I

need only observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned

Magistrate in response to the summons received by him, the learned

Magistrate must proceed to consider the application for bail on merits,

in accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself. The application must be considered in the light of the decisions

in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339) and

Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) also.

3. With the above observations this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.

4. Hand over the order.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm