Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.GIREESAN, S/O.K.V.RAMAN MENON versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.GIREESAN, S/O.K.V.RAMAN MENON v. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 2226 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 12697 (11 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2226 of 2007()

1. K.GIREESAN, S/O.K.V.RAMAN MENON,
... Petitioner

2. M.B.MOHAN, S/O.BHASKARAN,

3. PRAKASH VASUDEVAN, 89-A,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.M.C.JOHN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :11/07/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 2226 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 11th day of July, 2007

O R D E R

The petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in a prosecution under the provisions of the Kerala Forest Act. The petitioners face indictment on the allegation that a portion of a temporary building constructed by them trespasses into the forest. It is submitted that the petitioners have filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings initiated against them.

2. Be that as it may, when the matter came up for trial on 28.5.2007 the petitioners were not present. It would appear that one witness was present - ready to be examined. The petitioners' counsel was not ready to go on with the trial. The learned Magistrate in these circumstances rejected the application filed by the counsel to excuse the absence of the petitioners and directed issue of non-bailable warrants to the accused and notice to the sureties of the accused. The petitioners hence find themselves facing the unenviable predicament of warrants of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing them. They pray that appropriate directions may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No. 2226 of 2007 2

3. It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate why they could not appear on the last date of posting. I find no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioners when they surrender before the learned Magistrate, on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Their bail applications, if filed with sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor, must be disposed of on the date of surrender itself.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be given breathing time to appear before the learned Magistrate and the non-bailable warrants issued against them may not be executed till then. I am satisfied that the petitioners can be granted time till 23.7.2007. Till that date the warrants of arrest issued against the petitioners shall not be executed.

5. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly dismissed with the above observations.

6. Hand over copy of the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm Crl.M.C.No. 2226 of 2007 3


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.