✦ Kerala High Court · 01 Aug 2007

After the decision in Bharat Chaudhary v. State ofBihar

BAIL APPL No. 4647 of 2007R BASANT2 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

R.BASANT, J= = = = = = = = = = = = = B.A.No.4647 of 2007= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of August, 2007ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 452I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. The petitioner could not appear before the learned Magistrate . Thelearned Magistrate has issued coercive processes against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. In these circumstances, appropriate directions may be issued under section 438 Cr.P.C and/or 482 Cr.P.C, prays the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is a further statement that the parties have settled their disputes.2. After the decision in Bharat Chaudhary v. State of Bihar [A.I.R 2003 S.C 4662], it is trite that powers under Section 438Cr.P.C can be invoked in favour of a person who apprehends arrest inexecution of a non bailable warrant issued by a court in a pending proceedings. But even for that, sufficient and satisfactory reasons must be shown to exist. I am not persuaded in the facts and circumstances of this case to conclude that any such reasons exist. B.A.No.4647 of 200723.It is for the petitioner to appear before the learnedMagistrate and explain to the learned Magistrate the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Magistrate.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 Superintendentof Police [2003(1) KLT 339].4.This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the specific observation that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistratemust proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously -on the date of surrender itself, unless there are compelling reasons. (R.BASANT, JUDGE)sj/True copy/P.A.to Judge

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Kerala High Court, on 01 Aug 2007. 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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. BAIL APPL No. 4647 of 2007). ← Search more judgments