Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GEETHANJALI NAIR versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


GEETHANJALI NAIR v. STATE OF KERALA - Crl MC No. 283 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 2561 (5 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 283 of 2007()

1. GEETHANJALI NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.S.M.ALTHAF

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :05/02/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.NO. 283 OF 2007

Dated this the 5th day of February, 2007

ORDER

The petitioner - a woman, faces the allegations, inter alia, under Sec.420 read with Sec.34 of the IPC. The case has been registered as C.C.No.264/95 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. The petitioner has not appeared before the learned Magistrate so far. According to her, she had no information whatsoever against the pendency of the said case. That case is now transferred to the list of Long Pending Cases as L.P.No.174/99. The petitioner now wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends that if she surrenders before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, the learned Magistrate may not consider her application for bail 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 her on bail when she appears before the learned Magistrate.

2. It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned CRL.M.C.NO. 283 OF 2007 -: 2 :- Magistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which she 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).

3. 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.