Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SIJU versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SIJU v. STATE OF KERALA - Crl MC No. 192 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 1847 (23 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 192 of 2007()

1. SIJU
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.M.J.SANTHOSH

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :23/01/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2007

Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2007

ORDER

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.420 read with Sec.34 of the IPC. He is the 5th accused. Anticipatory bail was granted in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate in compliance with the directions. Later, on 4/12/06 the petitioner could not appear before the learned Magistrate. An application was filed to excuse the abscene of the petitioner. The learned Magistrate rejected the said application and issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest to procure the presence of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner apprehends that if he appears and applies for bail before the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate may not consider his application for bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. The petitioner claims to have satisfactory reasons to justify his failure to appear on 4/12/06. CRL.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2007 -: 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 have no reason to assume that the 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.