Kerala High Court
Jayachandran Nair vs State Of Kerala on 23 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 3RD VAISAKHA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 2986 OF 2024
CRIME NO.0109/2023 OF MARADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.4764 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - VIII, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2:
1 JAYACHANDRAN NAIR
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O DHAMODHARAN NAIR, H NO 414-C,
VAIGA, NOCHIMA, NAD POST, ALUVA, PIN - 683 563
2 VINODINI JAYACHANDRAN
AGED 49 YEARS, W/O JAYACHANDRAN NAIR,H NO 414-C,
VAIGA, NOCHIMA, NAD POST, ALUVA, PIN - 683 563
BY ADVS.
M.R.SARIN
M.R.SASITH
PARVATHI KRISHNA
SNEHA JOY
SAUMYA.P.S
ASHA MARY KURIAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
MARADU POLICE STATION, PIN - 682 304
BY ADV.
SMT. S. SEETHA, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.2986 of 2024
------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for the sake of brevity).
2. The petitioners are the accused in C.C. No.4764/2023 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam arising from Crime No.109/2023 of Maraud Police Station.
3. It is submitted that a bailable warrant is issued against the petitioners and the case is posted to 22.07.2024. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024 3 petitioners are ready to surrender before the trial court but the petitioners apprehend that, if they surrender before the trial court, the trial court may remand them, without considering their bail application.
4. The Public Prosecutor submitted that no such apprehension is necessary and this court may not pass any direction to the lower court to release the petitioners on bail and that is a matter to be decided by the trial court.
5. This court in Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambadi v. State of Kerala and another (2009 (3) KHC 471) relied on the dictum laid down by another learned Single Judge in Biju S. Praveen v. State of Kerala and Another (2007 (2) KLT 280) considered this point. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of Vineeth Somarajan's case CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024 4 (supra).
"14. The apprehension of the petitioner is that if he appears before the Trial Court, he would be remanded to judicial custody. In Biju v. State of Kerala, 2007 KHC 3436 : 2007 (2) KLT 280 :
2007 (1) KLJ 713 : ILR 2007 (2) Ker. 26 : 2007 (1) KLD 486, Justice A. K. Basheer, after noticing the practice that is being followed by some learned Magistrates (vide paragraph 16) held at paragraph 18 thus:
'18. As mentioned earlier, Criminal Courts should always be careful while passing orders on bail applications which in effect deal with personal liberty. In cases where the Court decides to send an accused to custody pending trial, it must be ensured that the Court applies its mind judicially and judiciously with particular reference to the facts and circumstances of the case. The mere fact that the accused had failed to respond to a summons or that the Court had to issue non bailable warrant to compel his presence will not ipso facto empower the Criminal Court to remand the accused to custody as a punitive measure when he appears before the Court CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024 5 on his own volition or is produced in execution of the warrant. The bail application that may be moved on his behalf has to be considered and orders should be passed on the same day itself since personal liberty of an accused cannot be curtailed in a whimsical or disdainful manner.' I am in respectful agreement with the dictum laid down in Biju v. State of Kerala."
6. In the light of the above dictum laid down by this Court, I think, the apprehension of the petitioners that the jurisdictional court will remand the accused without application of mind is unnecessary.
Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of with the following directions:
1) The petitioners shall surrender before the jurisdictional court within three weeks from today. If an application for CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024 6 bail with advance copy to the prosecutor concerned is filed at the time of surrender by the petitioners, the jurisdictional court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it, in accordance with law, ideally on the date of surrender itself.
2) In order to enable the petitioners to appear before the court below, coercive proceedings pending against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN nvj JUDGE CRL. M.C. NO.2986 OF 2024 7 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2986/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 109/2023 OF MARAUD POLICE STATION IN ERNAKULAM ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF E-COURTS HISTORY OF CC NO 4764/2023 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT VIII, ERNAKULAM RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE