IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 7586 of 2007()
1. SHIJOY, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. LAKSHMANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :07/12/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
B.A.No.7586 of 2007
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of December 2007
O R D E R
Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces
indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia
under Section 498A I.P.C. Crime was registered in 2005. Final
report was filed and cognizance was taken also in 2005. The
petitioner was not available in India. The learned counsel for the
petitioner points out that the crime was registered on a day after
the petitioner left India. The petitioner continues to be
employed abroad. He is coming to India by the end of this
month. Reckoning him as an absconding accused, coercive
processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned
Magistrate. The petitioner finds such processes chasing the
petitioner. He apprehends imminent arrest as soon as he
returns to India.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was
not wilful or deliberate. He has no knowledge of the prosecution
initiated against him. The petitioner is willing to surrender
B.A.No.7586/07 2
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].
4. In the result, this bail application is dismissed but
with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders
before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving
B.A.No.7586/07 3
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. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner shall be reaching India on 30/12/2007. In the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case I am satisfied that
the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner by the learned
Magistrate shall not be executed till 07/01/2008. On or before
that date, the petitioner must surrender before the learned
Magistrate and seek regular bail.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
B.A.No.7586/07 4
B.A.No.7586/07 5
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007