IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1864 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.587/2007 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- SHAILESH KUMAR, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, KODANVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KARUVATTA MURI, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.1864 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010 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.4 in Crime No.587 of 2007 of Adoor Police Station. 2. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the case and now it is pending as C.P.No.45 of 2008 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adoor. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is stated that the petitioner was not arrested during the crime stage. The petitioner moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta. That application was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before court. But, the petitioner could not comply with the direction as he was employed in Gujarat. 4. Non bailable warrant was issued by the court for the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant. Therefore, he has filed BA No.1864/2010 2 this application for anticipatory bail. 5. 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 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). 6. In Sukumari v. State of Kerala (2001 (1) KLT 22) it was held that the Magistrate has jurisdiction to grant bail even in respect of an offence exclusively triable by a court of Session. 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