High Court Kerala High Court

Pankaj Bahiman Bhatt vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 9 August, 2007

Kerala High Court
Pankaj Bahiman Bhatt vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 9 August, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 4826 of 2007()


1. PANKAJ BAHIMAN BHATT,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. BHARAT BAHIMAN BHATT,
3. BADRAKUMAR,

                        Vs



1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :09/08/2007

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                    = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                         B.A. No.4826 Of 2007
                   = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                Dated this the 9th day of August, 2007

                                 ORDER

Petitioners face allegations for offence punishable inter alia under

Sec.448 read with 34 IPC. All offences are bailable but as the final

report shows the petitioners are absconding the learned Magistrate has

issued non bailable warrant at the first instance under section 204

Cr.P.C.

2. According to the petitioners they are absolutely innocent.

They were never absconding. The mere fact that the Investigating

Officer has shown that the petitioners are absconding, the learned

Magistrate should not have chosen to issue non bailable warrant under

Sec.204 Cr.P.C. at the first instance. The petitioners are willing to

appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail, but the

petitioners apprehend that their application for regular bail may not

be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits in accordance with

law and expeditiously. The petitioner prays that directions under

Section 438 may be issued in his favour. In these circumstances,

appropriate directions may be issued under section 438 Cr.P.C, prays

the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. After the decision in Bharat Chaudhary v. State of Bihar

[A.I.R 2003 S.C 4662], it is trite that powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C

B.A.No.4826 of 2007 2

can be invoked in favour of a person who apprehends arrest in

execution of a non bailable warrant issued by a court after taking

cognizance . I am satisfied that directions under section 438 Cr.P.C

can be issued.

4. In the result, this petition is allowed.

i) Warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners shall not

be executed till on 16.8.07.

ii) They shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11

a.m. on 16.08.07 they shall be released on regular bail on condition

that they execute bonds for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand

only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the

satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.

(iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned

Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the

petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law, as if these

directions were not issued at all.

(v) If they were arrested prior to 16/8/2007, they shall be

released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees

twenty five thousand only) without any sureties, undertaking to appear

before the learned Magistrate on 16.08.07.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
sj