HARIHARAN ALIAS HARI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the second accused in a prosecution interalia under Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The final report has been filed. Cognizance has already been taken. The matter is pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Manjeri. All the other accused except the petitioner and another accused have already been tried. They have been found not guilty and acquitted. The petitioner was employed abroad. He could not therefore appear and participate in the proceedings. He is now willing to appear before the learned Sessions Judge. He has come to this court with the prayer that the proceedings against him may be quashed, the co-accused having already been acquitted.

(2.) After discussions at the bar, the learned counsel for the petitioner in the light of the Full Bench decision in Moosa vs. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552 (FB)] only prays that there may be a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider the petitioner's application for bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously when he surrenders. He having not appeared before the courts for a long period of time, he apprehends that the case against him may not be considered on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. He therefore prays that appropriate direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued.

(3.) It is for the petitioner to appear before the learned Sessions Judge and explain to the learned Sessions Judge, the circumstances under which he could not earlier appear before the learned Sessions Judge .