Kerala High Court
Prasanth 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. 2367 OF 2024
CRIME NO.639/2018 OF BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.860 OF 2018 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, ALUVA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
PRASANTH
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O. GOPINATHAN NAIR, PUNARJANI HOUSE, MOOLEPEEDIKA,
WEST KADUNGALOOR, ALANGAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683110
BY ADVS.
K.R.VINOD
M.S.LETHA
NABIL KHADER
JIJO M.P.
DEVIKA S.
APARNA SHAJI
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SMT. SHEEBA THOMAS, 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.2367 of 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.2367 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. Petitioner is an accused in C.C.No.860/2018 on
the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - II,
Aluva. The above case is charge sheeted alleging
offences punishable under Section 323 IPC. Annexure
A1 is the Final Report. Now a warrant is pending against
the petitioner in the above case.
3. The petitioner submits that he is ready to
surrender before the jurisdictional court. But the
apprehension of the petitioner is that, if he surrender
before the jurisdictional court, the jurisdictional court
may remand him without considering his 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:
'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 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
DM
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 THE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY
THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER IN
C.C.NO.860/2018 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.II,
ALUVA
ANNEXURE A2 THE COPY OF THE E-COURT PROCEEDINGS
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
