Sumesh vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 11441 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 11441 Ker
Judgement Date : 23 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Sumesh 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. 3760 OF 2024
    CRIME NO.123/2004 OF Vallikunnam Police Station, Alappuzha
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN LP NO.11 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL
           FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KAYAMKULAM

PETITIONER/2nd ACCUSED :-

          SUMESH, AGED 40 YEARS
          S/O. SOMARAJAN,MEENATHETHIL PUTHENVEEDU,
          KARAZHMA MURI, VALLIKKUNAM VILLAGE OFFICE,,
          ALAPPUZHA ., PIN - 690106

          BY ADV RASHEED C.NOORANAD


RESPONDENT/STATE :-

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REP BY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031

    2     STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          VALLIKKUNNAM POLICE STATION,
          ALAPPUZHA., PIN - 695033



          SMT.SEETHA S SR.PP


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 3760 OF 2024
                                    2


                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                      --------------------------------
                     Crl.M.C. No. 3760 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 petitioner is an accused in L.P.No.11 of 2024 of

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - II, Kayamkulam. The

above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner alleging

offence punishable under Sections 8(1)(2), 55(a)(g) of the

Kerala Abkari Act. Since the petitioner was not able to appear

before the lower court, his case was split up and numbered as

L.P.No.11 of 2024 and the warrant is pending against the

petitioner.

3. The petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready

to surrender before the jurisdictional court and if he

surrender before the jurisdictional court, jurisdictional court CRL.MC NO. 3760 OF 2024

may remand him 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 petitioner 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

(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:

CRL.MC NO. 3760 OF 2024

'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 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 petitioner 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 CRL.MC NO. 3760 OF 2024

directions:

1) The petitioner shall surrender before the jurisdictional court within three weeks from today. If an application for bail with advance copy to the prosecutor concerned is filed at the time of surrender by the petitioner, the jurisdictional court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, ideally on the date of surrender itself.

2) In order to enable the petitioner to appear before the court below, coercive proceedings pending against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

SMA CRL.MC NO. 3760 OF 2024

PETITIONER ANNEXURES :-