Leela Sukumaran v. The State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/6TH PHALGUNA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 1026 of 2015 () --------------------------- CC 2108/2011 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, IRINJALAKUDA ============= PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED:
-------------------------------------------- LEELA SUKUMARAN, AGED 60 YEARS W/O.LATE KAITHAVALAPIL SUKUMARAN AMBALLUR VILLAGE DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT/STATE OF KERALA:
-------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM - 682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S. HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1026 of 2015 () APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ A1:
A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C NO.2108/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE J F C M, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 24/3/2011.
AII:
A TRUE COPY OF THE CC NO.2478/2011 PENDING BEFORE THE JFCM, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 17/7/2010.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE SD
P. UBAID, J.
CR (SN) --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1026 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2015
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the accused in nine complaints brought under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. All these cases are now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakkuda. She wants to surrender before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail. She somehow got information from some source, which is not known, that the learned Magistrate would insist on production of different sets of sureties in the nine cases. It is not known from where the petitioner got such information. Any way, she apprehends that she will be remanded to custody in case she could not produce eighteen sureties. I do not think that the learned Magistrate will insist on production of different sets of sureties in the different cases. What the court would look into is not in fact the number of the sureties, but the solvency of the sureties produced by the accused to the extent of the total amount of the bond ordered in the nine cases. This Court does not think that any Magistrate in
Crl.M.C.No.1026 of 2015 Kerala will maintain such an unjust or impractical approach. With the above observations, this Crl.M.C. is closed. The petitioner can very well surrender before the learned Magistrate and make application for bail.
Sd/- P. UBAID, JUDGE sd