IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5654 of 2011() ----------------------------- S.C.No.281/2006 OF ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS (AD-HOC) COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.64/2003 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: ACCUSED : ---------------------- 1. SATHEESH, S/O.SADANANDAN PILLAI, ANANDA BHAVANAM, ANJILITHANAM P.O., PADINJATTUSSERRY, KAVIYOOR. 2. SANTHOSH, S/O.APPU, SANTHOSH BHAVAN, KAVIYOOR P.O. 3. SAJIKUMAR, S/O.BHASKARAN, MADATHILKALAYIL, KAVIYOOR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5654 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.64 of 2003 of Thiruvalla Police Station, which is now pending as S.C.No.281 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc-I), Pathanamthitta. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 427 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in execution of a non-bailable warrant issued by the Additional District & Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc-I), Pathanamthitta. The non-bailable warrant was issued on account of non-appearance of the petitioners before the Sessions Court. 4. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambady v. State of Kerala (2009 (3) KHC 471), it was held that where non- bailable warrant is issued by the court on account of non- Bail Appln.No.5654/2011 : 2 : appearance of the accused, normally, the person against whom the warrant is issued has to approach the Court which issued the warrant for re-calling the warrant and for the grant of bail. He cannot, normally, straight away approach the High Court by filing a Bail Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was also noticed in that decision that when such an application for bail is filed, the learned Magistrate has to dispose of the Bail Application in the light of the principles laid down in Biju v. State of Kerala (2007 (2) KLT 280). 5. In Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) it was held that the power under Section 437 can be exercised even in cases where offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions. Reserving the right of the petitioners 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 skj