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. 10188 of 2011 L.P.NO.68 OF 2010 (C.C.NO.666/2006) OF JFMC, PALA CRIME NO.77 OF 2001 OF PALA POLICE STATION. PETITIONER: 2ND ACCUSED: -------------------- ANILAL A.V.,S/O.ABDUL VAHID, AGED 37 YEARS, BIZMI MANZIL, KOPPAM VILLAGE, VALIKODU MURI, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RENJITH 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. 10188 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011 O R D E R The petitioner was the second accused in Crime No.77 of 2001 of Pala Police Station, Kollam District. The case was taken on file as C.C.No.666 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Pala. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner, the case against him was split up and the case against him is pending as L.P.No.68 of 2010. It is stated by the petitioner that the other accused persons were acquitted after trial. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-bailable warrant issued by the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Pala. Hence, the petitioner has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 2. It is stated in the Bail Application thus: “ The petitioner is made as 2nd accused in the crime. He was not arrested in the crime stage. The investigating officer filed final report in the case and process was issued from JFMC, Pala as BAIL APPL. NO.10188 OF 2011 :: 2 :: C.C.No.666/2006. Since the petitioner was in Gulf, no process was served on him and he failed to appear and co-operate with the trial. The case against other accused persons were continued and ended in acquittal. The case against the petitioner was split up and included in the long pending list as L.P.No.68/2010 on the file of JFMC, Pala.” 3. 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, 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 BAIL APPL. NO.10188 OF 2011 :: 3 :: 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/