IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH MAY 2009 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2539 of 2009() ----------------------------- LPR.339/2007 of J.M.F.C., KODUNGALLUR CRIME NO.49/2007 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- SREEJESH, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, VALORA HOUSE, CHENTRAPPINNI P.O., EDATHIRUTHY VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION MATHILAKAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. JIKKU JACOB, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ====================================== B.A.No.2539 of 2009 ====================================== Dated this the 19th day of May 2009 ORDER The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.49 of 2007 of Mathilakam Police Station for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 427, 308 read with Section 149 IPC. It is reported that a charge sheet has already filed and that since the petitioner was abroad, the case against the petitioner was split up and transferred to L.P.Register. Now the petitioner had returned from Gulf Countries. He would apprehend that he would be arrested under the orders of this Court. Hence, in the event of arrest,seeking an order directing the respondent to release the petitioner on bail, this petition was filed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that attempt of arrest was already under the orders of this Court and that the apprehension of the petitioner is that the petitioner may not get bail from the trial court for the reason that the petitioner was reported absconding. 3. Having heard the petition, I find that the petitioner had sufficiently explained the default in appearing before the Court. However, this is not a fit case to grant an order under Section B.A.No.2539 of 2009 2 438 of the Cr.P.C. But the petitioner has to seek regular bail after explaining the circumstances. There is nothing to conclude that the petitioner would not get a fair deal from the magistrate. In the result, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Magistrate and file an application for bail which shall be disposed of on merit on the same date. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE css/