High Court Kerala High Court

Shahul Hameed vs State Of Kerala on 8 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
Shahul Hameed vs State Of Kerala on 8 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 148 of 2010()


1. SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 65 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.PRAMOD

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :08/01/2010

 O R D E R
                      K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                   ---------------------------
                     B.A. No. 148 of 2010
               ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010

                           O R D E R

It is stated that the petitioner is the accused in ICC Case

No.68/2005 on the file of the Court of SDJM, Sambalpur,

Orissa.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that the case was initiated on a complaint filed by one Rani

Appari under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The petitioner received the summons in 2005. It is stated that

he arranged a lawyer to defend the case. The petitioner states

that he was laid up due to cardiac ailments, diabetes and

hypertension. Therefore, he could not follow up the case

properly. Now a non-bailable warrant is issued by the court.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the non-

bailable warrant and therefore he has filed this Bail Application

for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

3. When a non-bailable warrant is issued by a court in

another state, normally no relief under Section 438 of the

B.A. No. 148 /2010
2

Code of Criminal Procedure would be granted in respect of the

case. The only prayer made by the petitioner is to grant

breathing time so that he can appear before the court concerned

and seek appropriate relief. The request is just and reasonable.

Accordingly, there will be a direction that the non-bailable

warrant issued by SDJM court Sambalpur in Orissa in ICC Case

No.68/2005 shall not be executed for a period of one month in

order to enable the petitioner to appear before the court

concerned and to seek appropriate relief.

The Bail Application is disposed of as above.

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

scm