Kerala High Court
P.K.Mathai vs The Federal Bank Ltd on 23 May, 2008
Author: R.Basant
Bench: R.Basant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2007 of 2008()
1. P.K.MATHAI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.KURIAKOSE PETER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :23/05/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2007 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. When the matter stood posted for judgment on 29/03/2008, the petitioner did not appear. On that day and subsequent dates to which the case was posted by the learned Magistrate, the petitioner did not appear. Coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been dutifully appearing before the court on all previous dates of posting. It is only because he was not well and the case was posted in quick succession two near dates by the learned Magistrate, he could not appear before the learned Magistrate on 29/3/2008 and thereafter. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. His absence earlier was not wilful or deliberate. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. But he apprehends that his application for bail may not be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He, therefore, prays that directions under Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 2 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.
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.
Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.2007/08 4 R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007