IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 191 of 2009() ---------------------------- C.C.NO.40/2000 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KATTAKKADA PETITIONER (S): -------------------- M.V. SOMARAJAN, AMBATHUMVILA VEEDU, KUTTICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 191 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is an accused in C.C. no. 40/2000 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Kattakada. The alleged offence is under section 323 IPC. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner apprehends arrest, since non bailable warrant is issued against him from the court. He was released on bail on earlier and warrant is issued subsequently. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that offences involved are bailable offences and hence, petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that petitioner is required in a case which is instituted as early as in 2000 about nine years back. The offence involved is only bailable offence and even if there is apprehension of arrest, anticipatory bail cannot be granted under section 438 Cr.P.C. Petitioner is bound to surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned and co-operate with the trial. Hence, the following order is passed:- BA 191/2009 2 1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned without any delay. 2) No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this Court, since on the facts in this case, this Court ordered that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail and any order to the contrary in any subsequent anticipatory bail application will amount to review, which is impermissible in law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.