BAIL APPL No. 72 of 2008 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 72 of 2008() --------------------------- CC.557/2005 of J.M.F.C.-II,KOTTARAKKARACRIME NO.174/1995 OF EZHUKONE POLICE STATION .................... : APPLICANT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- VERGISON GEORGE, S/O GEORGE, VARGESA BHAVAN, ANDOOR MURI, VALAKOM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) SRI.P.V.SREENIJIN SMT.K.B.SONY SRI.PRASUN.S. RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J------------------------------------B.A.No.72 of 2008-------------------------------------Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008ORDERApplication for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces indictmentin a prosecution for the offences punishable under Section 420 r/w34 I.P.C. The crime was registered in 1995. Final report was filed. Cognizance was taken. The petitioner was not arrested at thecrime stage. He did not appear before the learned Magistrateafter cognizance was taken. Co-accused have already been triedand acquitted, it is submitted. The case against the petitioner hasbeen split up. The same is now pending as C.C.557 of 2005.Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coerciveprocesses have been issued against the petitioner. The petitionerapprehends imminent arrest.
According to the petitioner, he is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. He is willing tosurrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. Buthe apprehends that his application for regular bail may not beconsidered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordancewith law and expeditiously. It is therefore prayed that directions B.A.No.72 of 20082under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued in favour of thepetitioner.
It is for the petitioner to appear before the learnedMagistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate thecircumstances under which he could not earlier appear before thelearned Magistrate. I have no reason to assume that the learnedMagistrate would not consider such application on merits, inaccordance with law and expeditiously. Every court must do thesame. No special or specific direction appears to be necessary. Sufficient general directions have already been issued in AliceGeorge v. The Deputy Superintendent of Police [2003(1)KLT 339].
This bail application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the specific observation that if the petitionerappears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail aftergiving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of thecase, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriateorders on merits and expeditiously - on the date of surrenderitself. (R.BASANT, JUDGE)rtr/- B.A.No.72 of 20083
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 09 Jan 2008. The bench was R BASANT.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.