High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
ANTONY JOSE PANJIKKARAN, PANJIKKARAN v. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC - Crl MC No. 1108 of 2007  RD-KL 7116 (4 April 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMCrl MC No. 1108 of 2007()
1. ANTONY JOSE PANJIKKARAN, PANJIKKARAN,
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
O R D E R
R.BASANT, JCrl.M.C.Nos.1108 and 1109 of 2007
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2007
ORDERThe common petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.141 of 2007 and the 2nd accused in C.C.386 of 2002, both pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, North Paravur. In one case, he faces allegations, inter alia, under Section 379 I.P.C, whereas in the other, he faces allegations, inter alia, under Section 353 read with 34 I.P.C.
2. The petitioner is a person employed abroad. He finds that warrants of arrest issued by the learned Magistrate to procure his presence are chasing him. The petitioner was employed abroad and there was no wilful default on his part in appearing before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner is now willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate, but he apprehends that in view of his prior conduct of not appearing before the learned Magistrate, his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He therefore prays that a direction may be issued under Section 482 Cr.P.C to the learned Magistrate to release him on bail when he appears and applies for bail. Crl.M.C.Nos.1108 and 1109 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. The learned Magistrate must consider such application for bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. I have no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider such application on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do the same. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in Alice George v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1) KLT 339].
4. These Crl.M.Cs are, in these circumstances, 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 and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself.
5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.