IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2011 / 2ND POUSHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 10568 of 2011() ------------------------------ CC.671/2009 of J.M.F.C.-III,THRISSUR CRIME NO.203/09 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DT. .................... PETITIONER ------------------------------ ANEESH, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.ARAVINDAKSHAN, KOZHIPARAMBIL VEETTIL AYYATNOLE VILLAGE, PULLAZHY DESOM, THRISSUR DIST BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY P.P.SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.10568 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2011 ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non- bailable warrant issued in C.C.No.671 of 2009 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Thrissur. Hence, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 2. In paragraph 3 of the Bail Application, it is stated as follows:- “The applicant had gone out of Kerala in search of a job and was not present in his native place during the period of registration of crime. It is understood that final report was filed in the above crime and the case stands posted as C.C.No.671/09 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court No.III, Thrissur and non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant. The applicant apprehend arrest in execution of the warrant and will be remanded to custody.” 3. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambady v. State of Kerala (2009 (3) KHC 471), it was held that where non- Bail Appln.No.10568/2011 : 2 : 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 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 petitioner 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