IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6398 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 110/2003 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION ................... PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ RAJESH AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH, PANAKKAL HOUSE, P.O.KUNJITHAI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.PRADEEP KUMAR RESPONDENT: -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6398 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009 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.110/2003 of Vadakkekara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 448 and 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The aforesaid offences are bailable. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that charge sheet was filed on 20.08.2003. After taking cognizance, the case was numbered as C. C. No.156/2004 on the file of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, North Paravur. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was employed abroad. He did not receive any summons. Due to non appearance, non bailable warrant was issued against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant. B.A. No. 6398 of 2009 2 6. In Vineeth Simarajan @ Ambadi Vs. State of Kerala 2009(3) KLT 576, It was held that when a non bailable warrant is issued by a court, the remedy of the accused is not to apply for Anticipatory Bail but to appear before the court which issued the non bailable warrant and to apply for withdrawing the warrant and for the grant of bail. It was also held that when such an application is filed, the court which issued the warrant shall consider the same in the light of principles laid down in Biju Vs. state of Kerala 2007 (2) KLT 280. Reserving the right of the petitioner to apply for Regular Bail and for recalling the warrant as stated above, the bail application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln