IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 404 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRMP.127/2009 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM CRIME NO. 208/2007 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- DINESHAN, S/O.SATHYAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KOCHATTUPURAM, KADAKKAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI. SIVARAM R. MENON SRI. V. SHANKAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 404 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 30th day of January,2009 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308 read with section 149 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner along with other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, assaulted de facto complainant and committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is implicated as 15th accused. He is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. He is working in Bangalore and only now he came to know about the case. Only because petitioner happened to be an employee, his name was included. In the F.I.R. the name of petitioner is not mentioned. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this petition and submitted that charge was laid as early as on 27-11-2007 and more than a year has elapsed now. Petitioner was not available for investigation. Non bailable warrant would have been issued against him. Hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, it appears that petitioner's arrest is required for execution of a non bailable warrant issued by a BA 404/09 -2- competent court, since he was not appeared in court for the past more than a year. In a case of this nature, it is not proper for this Court to interfere with the proceedings before the trial court. If petitioner has a a case that he was not aware of the proceedings, etc., he may approach the trial court and satisfy the said court about his bona fides. At any rate, in a case where petitioner apprehends arrest not on the ground that he has committed a non bailable offence, but it is pursuant to a warrant issued by the court, under section 438 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked. Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest for execution of the warrant, if any issued and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.