Selvaraj vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 14 December, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3749 of 2007()


1. SELVARAJ, S/O.PARAMESWARAN, AGED 32
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.ANAND

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :14/12/2007

 O R D E R
                            R.BASANT, J.
                         ----------------------
                      Crl.M.C.No.3749 of 2007
                     ----------------------------------------
           Dated this the 14th day of December 2007

                                O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under

Section 498A read with 34 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on

the basis of a final report submitted by the police. The petitioner

did appear and get himself enlarged on bail. But subsequently

the petitioner has not been able to appear. Consequently

coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by

the learned Magistrate. The petitioner finds such processes

chasing him.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was

not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is 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.

Crl.M.C.No.3749/07 2

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].

4. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case 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.

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

for the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3749/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.3749/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007