Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JAMES, PROPRIETOR versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


JAMES, PROPRIETOR v. STATE OF KERALA - Bail Appl No. 5287 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 16703 (5 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5287 of 2007()

1. JAMES, PROPRIETOR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.A.C.DEVY

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :05/09/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

B.A.No.5287 of 2007

Dated this the 5th day of September 2007

O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The prosecution was launched as early as in 1999. The matter was initially pending as C.C.No.190/1999. Consequent to non-appearance of the petitioner, the case has later been transferred to the list of long pending cases. The learned Magistrate has issued coercive processes to secure the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner finds a warrant of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate chasing him.

2. According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. He was not served with any notice of summons to appear before court. He was allegedly blissfully ignorant of the pendency of the proceedings. The petitioner now wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate. But he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays that directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be issued to the learned Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail when he appears and applies for bail. B.A.No.5287/07 2

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 find absolutely no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider the application for bail to be filed by the petitioner on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific directions appear to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have been issued in Alice George vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1)KLT 339].

4. In the result, this bail application is dismissed but with the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and applies for 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, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge B.A.No.5287/07 3 B.A.No.5287/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007


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.