IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1879 of 2011() ----------------------------- ( CC.17/2002 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY) CRIME NO.147/98 OF CHAKKARAKAL POLICE STATION, KANNUR DIST. ................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- MOHAMMED SYED @ MUHAMMED SAHEED VANNATHAN, S/O.C.V.IBRAHIM (PKC IBRAHIM), ZEENATH MAHAL, MUNDYAD, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE S.H.O., CHAKKARAKAL POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK V. RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------- Bail Application No.1879 of 2011 ------------------------------- DATED: O R D E R Petitioner who is the accused in Crime No. 147 of 1998 of Chakkarakal Police Station, KannurDistrict and whose case is now pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery as C.C. No. 17 of 2002, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. Consequent on the non-appearance of the petitioner in the above C.C. Case, the case against the petitioner has been transferred to the Long Pending Case Register as L.P. Case No.20 of 2002. Admittedly, non-bailable warrants of arrest are pending against the petitioner. Anticipatory bail cannot be granted to nullify the process issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. There is no reason why the petitioner should not surrender before the Magistrate and seek regular bail. Accordingly, if the petitioner surrenders before the Magistrate and files an application for regular bail within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed notwithstanding the pendency of non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioner and also after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner for his previous non-appearance. With the above observation this application is disposed of . V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. ani/