IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2010 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1598 of 2010() ----------------------------- C.P.NO.29/2008 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHANGANACHERRY .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ------------------------------------------- PRADEEP, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.BHARATHAN, MEKHA NIVAS, AMARA P.O., THRIKKODITHANAM, CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.1598 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of March, 2010 O R D E R The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant issued in C.P.No.29 of 2008 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Changanacherry. It is stated that the offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(a) & (i) of the Abkari Act. 2. The Bail Application does not contain the details regarding the Crime Number, the date of alleged commission of the offence and the date on which the petitioner was directed to appear before the court. The petitioner only states that he was out of State 'for pursuing employment'. It is stated that in C.P.No.29 of 2008, non bailable warrant was issued for the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest. 3. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambady vs. State of Kerala (2009(3) KHC 471), it was held that in cases where non bailable warrant is issued by the court, 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 BA No.1598/2010 2 grant of bail. He cannot, normally, straight away approach the High Court invoking 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 vs. State of Kerala (2007(2) KLT 280). Reserving the right of the petitioner 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 csl