IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1313 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CP.10/2010 of J.M.F.C.-I, MAVELIKKARA CRIME NO. 62/2007 OF MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ---------------------------- MUHAMMED JINOS, S/O.NIZAR KUNJU, VELLOOR VEEDU, THAMARAKULAM WEST MURI, THAMARAKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT: --------------- S.I. OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1313 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 09th 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 accused No.1 in Crime No.62/2007 of Mavelikkara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120-B, 113, 143, 147, 148, 341, 326 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is stated that the petitioner was not arrested during the crime stage. He was not aware of the pendency of the case. It would appear that the case against him was split up. Now the case is numbered as C.P. No.10/2010 before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Mavelikkara. It is stated that the case against the other accused persons is now pending before the Sessions Court, the case against them having been committed by the learned Magistrate. 4. It would appear that a non bailable warrant was issued by the learned Magistrate against the petitioner for his arrest. B.A. No. 1313/2010 2 The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 5. 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 the 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]. 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 ln