IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 804 of 2008() ------------------------ CP.119/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER: IST ACCUSED ----------------------- SREENIVASAN, KICHU BHAVANAM, PATTOOR, IRANIKUZHY P.O., NOORNADU. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C. No. 804 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 27-02-2008 ORDER Petitioner who is the accused in Crime No. 325 of 2001 of Noornadu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 8 (1), (2) and 55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act and whose case is now pending before the J.F.C.M. -II, Kottarakkara as C.P. No. 119 of 2007 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Mavelikkara, seeks a direction to the said Magistrate to release the petitioner on bail on the date of his surrender itself. 2. Admittedly, non-bailable warrants of arrest are pending against the petitioner. The circumstances under which those non-bailable warrants of arrest came to be issued against the petitioner are not discernible to this Court. It is only proper that the petitioner surrenders before the J.F.C.M. and seeks regular bail. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of permitting the petitioner to surrender before the learned Magistrate and file an application for regular bail within a period of two weeks from today. In case, the petitioner complies with the above condition, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of on merits preferably on the same date on which it is filed notwithstanding the pendency of any non-bailable warrants, if any, against him and after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner for his previous non-appearance and also taking into account the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala - 2001 (1) KLT 22. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani