IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7754 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO.265/2007 OF VALLIKKUNNAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ NAJEEB M., S/O. MAJEED C.H., NOORMAHAL, PAVUMBA, MANAPPALLY NORTH KARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALLIKKUNNAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.7754 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of January, 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.265/2007 of Vallikkunnam Police Station, which is now pending as C.P. No.106/2009 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kayamkulam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that after completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed on 30/5/2009. It is stated that the learned Magistrate issued a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-bailable warrant. Therefore, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. B.A. No.7754/2009 2 4. 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]. Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the court which issued warrant, for recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail, this Bail Application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm