IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1055 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.186/2009 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- GOPINATHAN, S/O.CHAKRAPANI, SUNIL BHAVAN, PUNNAKULANJI, ULLANOOR MURI, KULANADA. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1055 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2010 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.186/2009 of Pandalam Police Station, which is now pending as C.P. No.95/2009 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adoor. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 56A of the Abkari Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during crime stage, the petitioner was not arrested. 4. Charge sheet was laid in the case on 27/3/2009, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Now the case is pending as C.P. No.95/2009 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adoor. Non bailable warrant was issued by the court for the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-bailable warrant. Therefore, he has filed B.A. No. 1055 / 2010 2 this application for anticipatory bail. 6. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambadi Vs. State of Kerala [2009(3) KHC 471], it was held that in cases where non-bailable warrant is issued by a court, the proper remedy of the accused is to approach that court which issued the warrant and to apply for recalling that warrant and for the grant of bail. It was also observed in Vineeth Somarajan's case that when such an application for bail is filed, the same has to be considered in the light of the principles laid down in Biju Vs. State of Kerala [2007(2) K.L.T 280]. In Sukumari Vs. State of Kerala [2001(1) K.L.T.22], it was held that the power under Section 437 can be invoked by the Magistrate even in cases involving a Session offence. Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the court which issued the non bailable warrant, for recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail, this Bail Application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE B.A. No. 1055 / 2010 3 scm