High Court Kerala High Court

Surendran vs State Of Kerala on 28 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Surendran vs State Of Kerala on 28 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4610 of 2008()



1. SURENDRAN
                      ...  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 :28/11/2008

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                      ------------------------------------
                     Crl.M.C. No.4610 of 2008
                      -------------------------------------
            Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008

                                  ORDER

Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence

punishable under Section 8 of the Kerala Abkari Act. Final

report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken.

Committal Proceedings has been registered. The petitioner has

not been arrested nor has he appeared before any court so far.

Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive

processes have been issued by the learned Magistrate against

the petitioner. The petitioner, who apprehends imminent arrest

in execution of such processes, has now come to this Court with

this petition praying for issue of directions under Section 482

Cr.P.C to the learned Magistrate to comply with the dicta in

Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003

(1) KLT 339] and Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T

22] and to consider his application for bail to be filed by him

when he surrenders before the learned Magistrate on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself.

Crl.M.C. No.4610 of 2008 2

2. Sufficient general directions have already been issued

in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police

[2003(1) KLT 339] and Sukumari v. State of Kerala [2001(1)

K.L.T 22]. I am not satisfied that it is necessary for this Court in

every subsequent case to issue directions under Section 482

Cr.P.C to the Magistracy to follow the dictum in Alice George v.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police and Sukumari v.

State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T 22]. Every court must do the

same. I have no reason to assume that the same shall not be

done. If there be non compliance, the avenues of

challenge/complaint are available for the petitioner.

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

with the above specific observations.

4. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel

for the petitioner for production before the court below.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-