Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

G.SUDHEER, AGED 38 YEARS versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


G.SUDHEER, AGED 38 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 1051 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 6704 (30 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1051 of 2007()

1. G.SUDHEER, AGED 38 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

For Petitioner :SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :30/03/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

Crl.M.C.No.1051 of 2007

Dated this the 30th day of March 2007

O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution interalia under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C. The petitioner was not available in India and therefore a warrant of arrest has been issued against him. The case has been transferred to the list of long pending cases. The alleged crime was committed as early as in 1991.

2. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the registration of the case against him at all. He has now come to know of the pendency of the case and issue of the warrant against him. The petitioner is now willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously by the learned Magistrate. He, therefore, prays that the 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. Crl.M.C.No.1051/07 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 Criminal Miscellaneous Case 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 unless there are exceptional and compelling reasons. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr Crl.M.C.No.1051/07 3 Crl.M.C.No.1051/07 4

R.BASANT, J

C.R.R.P.No.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF JULY 2006


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.