JOSHI KALLAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the third accused in a prosecution interalia for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,447 and 323 read with 149 I.P.C. All the substantive offences are compoundable offences, it is pointed out. The co- accused have all faced trial. They have already been found not guilty and acquitted by the competent courts. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him has hence split up. Non-bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner to procure the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate. The complainant has already compounded the offences. The petitioner apprehends that the learned Magistrate may not consider his application for bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

(2.) 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].

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to urge before the learned Magistrate that the charges can and need be framed against the petitioner only for the compoundable offences and if so, the composition can be accepted. An early consideration of that question may be directed, it is further submitted. I am satisfied that the learned Magistrate must accept the request of the petitioner for an early consideration of his contention that charges are liable to be framed only for compoundable offence against him.