Sherif vs State Of Kerala Represented By … on 19 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
Sherif vs State Of Kerala Represented By … on 19 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 257 of 2009()


1. SHERIF, S/O.MOIDEENABHA, PALLAM HOUSE, B
                      ...  Petitioner
2. YAKKOB, S/O.MOIDEENABHA,PALLAM HOUSE,

                        Vs



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

2. ANASEESA, AYASHA MANZIL, W/O.SHARIF,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :19/01/2009

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J
                       ------------------------------------
                      Crl.M.C. No.257 of 2009
                       -------------------------------------
              Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009

                                   ORDER

Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for the offence

punishable under Section 498 A r/w 34 I.P.C. The petitioners are

the husband and brother in law of the defacto complainant.

Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed.

Cognizance has been taken. The petitioners were not arrested at

the crime stage or thereafter. Reckoning them as absconding

accused, coercive processes have been issued by the learned

Magistrate against the petitioners. The petitioners apprehend

imminent arrest.

2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely

innocent. Their absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate.

They are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and

apply for bail. But they apprehend that their application for

regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on

merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is therefore

prayed that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued

in favour of the petitioners.

3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned

Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the

Crl.M.C. No.257 of 2009 2

circumstances under which they could not earlier appear before

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

learned Magistrate would not consider such application on

merits, 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].

4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but

with the specific observation that if the petitioners appear before

the learned Magistrate and apply 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 a copy of this order to the learned counsel

for the petitioners.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *