IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8826 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.205 OF 2008 OF KARIYILAKULANGARA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DT. PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ SHAJI,S/O.IBRAHIMKUTTY,AGED 36 YEARS, VANCHIYOOR,PATHIYOOR WEST,PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE S.I.OF POLICE,KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION,REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY P.P.SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------- B.A.No.8826 OF 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.205 of 2008 of Kariyilakulangara Police Station, Alappuzha District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406 and 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is submitted that after completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed and the case is now pending as C.C.No.698 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Haripad. Due to non appearance of the petitioner, non bailable warrant was issued against the petitioner. Petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant and therefore, he has B.A.No. 8826 OF 2011 2 filed this application for anticipatory bail. 4. It is submitted that the defacto complainant/wife had filed an application before the learned Magistrate under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and that case was referred to the Adalath. The disputes between the parties have been settled. Annexure-A2 is the award of the Lok Adalat. Annexure-A3 agreement was executed in which the father of the petitioner represented on his behalf. 5. 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 court has to B.A.No. 8826 OF 2011 3 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. cms