Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUNIL, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY PANIKKER versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SUNIL, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY PANIKKER v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 4021 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 3398 (13 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 4021 of 2006()

1. SUNIL, S/O.MUTHUSWAMY PANIKKER,
... Petitioner

Vs

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

For Petitioner :SRI.G.SUDHEER

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :13/12/2006

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.NO. 4021 OF 2006

Dated this the 13th day of December, 2006

ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The alleged incident occurred on 5/7/96. ,The petitioner was not available for arrest and the case against him is now transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases as L.P.No.26/98.

2. The petitioner, in these circumstances, wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner apprehends that his application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for a direction to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears before the learned Magistrate.

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 have no reason to assume that the CRL.M.C.NO. 4021 OF 2006 -: 2 :- learned Magistrate would not consider the petitioner's application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Every court must do the same. Sufficient general directions on this aspect have already been issued in the decision reported in Alice George v. Deputy Superintendent of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339).

4. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself, unless compelling and exceptional reasons are there. Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.