High Court Kerala High Court

Chandanath Mohamadali vs State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
Chandanath Mohamadali vs State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 7185 of 2009()


1. CHANDANATH MOHAMADALI, S/O.ABDULLA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.HARIDAS

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :27/01/2010

 O R D E R
                         K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                   ---------------------------------------------
                        B.A.No.7185 of 2009
                   ---------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010



                                ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is

accused No.3 in Crime No.209 of 1975 of Kunnamkulam Police

Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 201, 202, 342 and 143 read with Section 149 of the

Indian Penal Code.

3. It is stated that during the crime stage, the petitioner

was released on bail. Later, he went abroad in search of a job.

The case was tried against the other accused persons in

C.C.No.4 of 1976 on the file of the court of the Sub Divisional

Judicial Magistrate, Kunnamkulam. They were acquitted as per

the judgment dated 24th December, 1976. The case against the

petitioner was split up and it was treated as long pending case.

Non bailable warrant was issued against the petitioner. The

petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non bailable

BA No.7185/2009 2

warrant and therefore, he has filed this application for

anticipatory bail.

4. 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 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

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).

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Bail

Application is disposed of as follows:

The petitioner, Chandanath Mohammadali, shall appear

before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class,

Kunnamkulam within a period of ten days from today and apply

for recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail. On such an

BA No.7185/2009 3

application being filed, the learned Magistrate shall recall the

non bailable warrant and release the petitioner on bail on the

same date, on such conditions as may be deemed fit and proper.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl