T.Asoke vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 4 June, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1834 of 2009()


1. T.ASOKE, THACHAMBALATH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :04/06/2009

 O R D E R
              M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

              ------------------------------------------
               CRL.M.C.NO.1834 OF 2009
              ------------------------------------------

                 Dated        4th    June 2009


                           O R D E R

Petitioner is the accused in C.C.452/2004 of

Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode.

Prosecution case against petitioner is that on

10/3/2004 at about 7.30 a.m petitioner trespassed

into the house of defacto complainant and committed

mischief by destroying the telephone as well as flower

plots and also uttered obscene words and thereby

committed offences under Sections 452, 427, 323 and

294(b) of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner was earlier

released on bail. According to the petitioner due to

unforeseen reason he could not appear on the date when

case was posted and as a result non bailable warrant

is issued and it is pending.

2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner

submitted that in the event of surrender of the

petitioner before the learned Magistrate, Magistrate

may be directed to release the petitioner on bail.

3. On going through the petition and the

CRMC 1834/09
2

document, I find this not a fit case to quash the

proceedings as sought for.

2. The question whether the ingredients of the

offence is proved or not can only be decided on the

evidence to be let in. If the allegations in the final

report as such are accepted it cannot be said that no

offence is made out. Hence the crime cannot be quashed.

When an absconding accused surrenders before the

Magistrate and moves an application for bail,

Magistrate is expected to pass orders in the

application without delay. If the petitioner

surrenders and files an application, I find no reason

to believe that Magistrate will not pass orders

immediately. In such circumstances, I find no reason to

issue any direction as sought for.

Petition is dismissed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.