Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BOSE POULOSE, AGED 42 YEARS versus STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


BOSE POULOSE, AGED 42 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE - Crl MC No. 2018 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 11229 (26 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2018 of 2007()

1. BOSE POULOSE, AGED 42 YEARS,
... Petitioner

2. ANANTHAN, AGED 36 YEARS,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :26/06/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 2018 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 26th day of June, 2007

O R D E R

The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution under Section 55 of the Kerala Abakari Act. Investigation is complete. Final report has been filed. Petitioners have received summons to appear before the learned Magistrate. They are willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. But in as much as the offence is one triable exclusively by a Court of Sessions, the petitioners apprehend that their applications for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is in these circumstances prayed that the learned Magistrate may be directed to consider the dictum in Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22).

3. It is certainly for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which they could not appear before the learned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the applications for bail to be filed by the petitioners when they surrender before the learned Magistrate, on Crl.M.C.No. 2018 of 2007 2 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 by this Court in the decision in Alice George v. Dy.S.P. of Police (2003 (1) KLT 339).

4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe 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 orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. I direct that the learned Magistrate must consider the play of dictum in Sukumari (supra) specifically. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


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.