High Court Kerala High Court

Christudas vs State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2010

Kerala High Court
Christudas vs State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 1907 of 2010()


1. CHRISTUDAS, S/O.MATHEWS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VINOD J.DEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :07/04/2010

 O R D E R
                        K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                       B.A.No.1907 of 2010
                  ---------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 7th 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 the

accused in Crime No.333 of 1996 of Parassala Police Station.

2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under

Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act.

3. During the crime stage, the petitioner was arrested

and he was released on bail. Thereafter, he absconded. The

case of the petitioner is that he went to Chennai in search of a

job. Since the petitioner did not appear, the case was treated as

long pending case and it was numbered as L.P.No.2 of 2008 on

the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-

II, Neyyattinkara. Non bailable warrant was issued against the

petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the

non bailable warrant. Therefore, he has moved this application

for anticipatory bail.

4. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambady vs. State of

BA No.1907/2010 2

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).

5. 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