IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8590 of 2011 -------- -------------------------- LPC.14/2011 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE CR.NO.809/05 OF KASARAGODE POLICE STATION ............................................................ (S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 -------------------------------------------------- 1. MUHAMMED FAISAL @ VANDI MASH, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RASHID, POLOTHU HOUSE, KAPPANADUKAM, CHEMNADU VILLAGE, KASARAGODE. 2. RAFEEQ, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 28 YEARS, PULIKKUNNU HOUSE, NEAR CHANDRAGIRI BRIDGE, KASABA VILLAGE, KASARAGODE. 3. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 26 YEARS, PERIYADUKAM HOUSE, CHOWKI, KUDLU VILLAGE, KASARAGODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASARAGODE POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: STU K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.8590 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2011 ORDER The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.809 of 2005 of Kasaragod Police Station. It is stated that during the crime stage, the petitioners were granted bail. It is stated that during the committal proceedings, the petitioners were granted bail and after committal they did not get summons. Therefore, they could not appear before court. However, non- bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioners. The petitioners apprehend arrest in execution of the non- bailable warrant. Therefore they have filed this application for anticipatory bail. 2. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambady v. State of Kerala (2009 (3) KHC 471), it was held that where non- bailable warrant is issued by the court on account of non- appearance of the accused, normally, the person against whom the warrant is issued has to approach the Court which issued the warrant for re-calling the warrant and for the grant of bail. He cannot, normally, straight away approach the High Bail Appln.No.8590/2011 : 2 : Court by filing a Bail Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was also noticed in that decision that when such an application for bail is filed, the court has to dispose of the Bail Application in the light of the principles laid down in Biju v. State of Kerala (2007 (2) KLT 280). Reserving the right of the petitioners to move the Court which issued the non-bailable warrant, to recall the warrant and to grant bail, this Bail Application is closed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj