R. BASANT v. Deputy Superintendent of Police(2003 (1) KLT 339)

R. BASANT, J.------------------------------------------------- B.A. No.2189 of 2008------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2008ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner – awoman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. She, itis submitted, was not arrested at the crime stage or thereafter. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate. Committal proceedings has been registered. Reckoning the petitioner as an absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner. Such processes are chasing the petitioner now. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Her absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner, in these circumstances, B.A. No.2189 of 2008 -: 2 :-wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The petitioner apprehends that her application for regular bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court for adirection to the learned Magistrate to release her on bail when she appears before the learned Magistrate.

After the decision in Bharat Chaudhary and anotherv. State of Bihar (AIR 2003 SC 4662), it is by now trite that powers under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked in favour ofa person who apprehends arrest in execution of a non-bailablewarrant issued by a court in a pending proceedings. But even for that, sufficient and satisfactory reasons must be shown toexist. I am not persuaded, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that any such reasons exist.

It is for the petitioner to appear before the learnedMagistrate 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'sapplication for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. No special or specific directions appear to B.A. No.2189 of 2008 -: 3 :-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).