IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7272 of 2009() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 233/2003 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- SHYNIAMMA, D/O. HYMAVATHI, AGED 44, PUTHENKATTIL VEEDU, AZEEKKAL MURI, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE CIRCLE OFICER, KARUNAGAPPALLY, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 7272 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.233/2003 of Karunagappally Excise Range, Kollam District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that after completing the investigation, charge was laid in the case on 15.04.2009. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not arrested during the stage of investigation and after filing the charge sheet, she did not get summons from the Court. Now, a non bailable warrant is issued by the Court. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant. B.A. No. 7272 of 2009 2 5. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambadi Vs. State of Kerala [2009 (3) KLT 576] it was held that in cases where non bailable warrant is issued by a court, the person against whom the warrant is issued has to approach the court which issued the warrant and to apply for recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail. In such circumstances, normally, the accused cannot straight away approach this court with a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was also observed in Vineeth Somarajan's case that when an application for recalling the warrant and for grant of bail is filed, such application shall be considered in the light of the principles laid down in Biju Vs. State of Kerala [2007(2) KLT 280]. Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the court which issued the warrant to recall the warrant and to grant bail, this Bail Application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln