IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 10182 of 2011 LP.62/2010 of J.M.F.C.-II,NEYYATTINKARA CRIME NO.641 OF 2007 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PETITIONER : ------------------------------ BIJU,AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.BALAN,PANANINNA VEEDU, CHOVVARA,KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 10182 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011 O R D E R It is stated that the petitioner is the accused in Crime No.641 of 2007 of Vizhinjam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code. The case was numbered as C.P.No.119 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Neyyattinkara, on the final report having been filed. However, due to non-appearance of the petitioner, the case was treated as long pending. Non-bailable warrant was issued against the petitioner by the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Neyyattinkara in L.P.No.62 of 2010. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-bailable warrant issued against him. Hence, the petitioner has 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, BAIL APPL. NO.10182 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 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 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 learned Magistrate 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). In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bail Application is closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court which issued the warrant to recall the warrant and to grant bail. When an application for bail is filed by the petitioner, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same in the light of the principles laid down in Vineeth Somarajan's case. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/