IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 6566 of 2009()
1. GIRIJA, W/O.RAJAN, UNNI NIVAS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :12/11/2009
O R D E R
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/