IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1066 of 2010() ----------------------------- CP.85/2009 of ADDL.C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM CRIME NO.278/2009 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: ------------------------------------------- SREEKANTAN,CHERUVATTUVILA,KUNNAPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTD BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1066 of 2010 ------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of March, 2010 O R D E R The first accused in Crime No.278/2009 of Poojappura Police Station has filed this application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is submitted that after completing the investigation, charge sheet was laid in the case and the case is pending as C.P. No.85/2009 on the file of the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. It is also submitted that a non bailable warrant was issued by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the warrant. The Bail Application is filed in these circumstances. 4. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambadi Vs. State of Kerala [2009(3) KHC 471], it was held that in cases where non-bailable warrant is issued by a court, the proper remedy B.A. No. 1066/2010 2 of the accused is to approach that court which issued the warrant and to apply for recalling that warrant and for the grant of bail. It was also observed in Vineeth Somarajan's case that when such an application for bail is filed, the same has to be considered in the light of the principles laid down in Biju Vs. State of Kerala [2007(2) K.L.T 280]. In Sukumari Vs. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T.22], it was held that the power under Section 437 can be invoked by the Magistrate even in cases involving a Session offence. Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the court which issued the non bailable warrant, for recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail, this Bail Application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm