IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6566 of 2009 C.C.NO.257 OF 2005 BEFORE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS II, THRISSUR. CRIME NO.200 OF 2004 OF THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION PETITIONER: 1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------ GIRIJA, W/O.RAJAN, UNNI NIVAS VALLAMCODU DESOM, KALLIYOOR VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 6566 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th 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 the first accused in C.C.No.257 of 2005, on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Thrissur. (Crime No.200 of 2004 of Thrissur West Police Station.) 2. The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 380 and 411 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was released on bail and she was appearing before Court regularly. The counsel also submitted the following: On 18.3.2009, the evidence on the side of the prosecution was closed. The case was posted to 6.4.2009 for questioning the accused under Section B.A. NO. 6566 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On that day, the petitioner was absent. On the application submitted by her to excuse her absence, the case was adjourned to 15.4.2009. On 15.4.2009 also the petitioner was absent. The court issued a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-bailable warrant. Hence this application is filed for anticipatory bail. 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-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 an 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). B.A. NO. 6566 OF 2009 :: 3 :: Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the Court which issued the non-bailable warrant for re-calling the warrant and for grant of bail, this Bail Application is closed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/