IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6142 of 2008() ----------------------------- CC.26/2006 of J.M.F.C.-IV,KOZHIKODE PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED: ---------------------------- C.V.SAKKARIAH, S/O.MOIDEEN KOYA, THOPPAYIL HOUSE, THELAKKALAKAM PARAMB, NADAKKAVU P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6142 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of October,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is an accused in C.C.No.26/2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-IV, Kozhikode. He apprehends arrest, since a non bailable warrant is issued against him because of his absence on 8-8-2007, when the case was posted for framing of charges. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was laid up with back pain due to disk prolapse and he was unable to move and therefore he could not appear in court but petitioner was represented by counsel. Admittedly, no petition was filed. Annexure-A1 and 2 are medical certificates. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that if petitioner is remanded to custody, it will cause irreparable injury and loss and hence, he may be granted anticipatory bail. 3. On hearing both sides, it is clear that petitioner apprehends arrest not on accusation of commission of a non bailable offence. He is apprehending arrest because non bailable warrant was issued against him, since he was absent in court and it is for securing his presence before the court. Therefore, going BA 6142/2008 2 by the provisions contained under section 438 Cr.P.C., anticipatory bail cannot be granted. 4. However, it appears that petitioner was laid up and he was unable to appear in court and may be he could not give proper instruction to the lawyer also and if these facts are brought to the notice of the court below, normally there is no reason why he shall be remanded to ensure his appearance during trial. Therefore, there is no apprehension of any unwarranted detention and hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.