IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 1734 of 2010()
1. K.K.KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI
... Petitioner
2. ARYADEVI, W/O.K.K.KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, SI OF POLICE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :08/04/2010
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 1734 of 2010
------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2010
O R D E R
Apprehending arrest in execution of non bailable warrant
issued in C.C.No.1807/2007 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
Magistrate of the First Class-I, Thrissur, the petitioner has
approached this court for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 3 in C.C.No.
1807/2007. It is stated that the offences alleged against them
are under Sections 417 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The
allegation is that the petitioners and others sold an item of
immovable property to one Shahul Hammed. The petitioners had
liability to pay sales tax. For the sales tax arrears, the property
sold to Shahul Hammed was about to be sold. In order to salvage
the property, Shahul Hammeed had to deposit Rs. 2,16,003/-.
According to Shahul Hammed, the petitioners and others had
cheated him in the matter of sale of the immovable property,
since they suppressed the fact that there was encumbrance on
the property.
B.A. No. 1734 of 2010 2
3. It is not necessary to consider the merits of this
contention. The petitioners are sought to be arrested in execution
of non bailable warrant issued by the Court.
4. In Vineeth Somarajan @ Ambadi Vs. State of Kerala
[2009 (3) KHC 471] it was held that in cases where non bailable
warrant is issued by a court, the proper remedy of the accused is
to approach that court which issued the warrant and to apply for
recalling the warrant and for the grant of bail. It was also
observed in Vineeth Somarajan’s case that when such an
application for bail is filed, the same has to be considered in the
light of the principles laid down in Biju Vs. State of Kerala [2007
(2) K.L.T. 280].
Reserving the right of the petitioner to move the Court
which issued the warrant to recall the warrant and to grant bail,
this Bail Application is closed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
ln