Abdul Rahiman and anr. Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

[n.k.patil ; h.s .kempanna j.] this mfa is filed u/s. 173(1) of mv act against the judgment and award dated. 16/08/2005 passed in mvc no. 123/2005 on the file of the learned ii addl. civil judge (sr.dn) and mact-iv. davangere, partly allowing the ciaim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.v. ramkumar, j. bail application no.6454 of 2010 dated: 8th day of november, 2010 o r d e r1. petitioners, who are accused nos. 5 and 6 in crime no.88/2009 of adhur police station for offences punishable under sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307 and 109 read with 149 i.p.c., seek anticipatory bail. 2. consequent on the non-appearance of the petitioners in c.p.no.174/2010 on the file of the j.f.c.m court-i, kasaragod non-bailable warrants of arrest are pending against the petitioners. anticipatory bail cannot be granted to nullify the process issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. there is no reason why the petitioners should not surrender before the magistrate and seek regular bail. accordingly, if the petitioners surrender before the magistrate and file an application for regular bail within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed notwithstanding the pendency of non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioners and also after considering the explanation offered by the petitioners for their previous non-appearance. 3. with the above observation this application is disposed of .

Judgment:

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

Bail Application No.6454 of 2010

DATED: 8th day of November, 2010

O R D E R

1. Petitioners, who are accused Nos. 5 and 6 in Crime No.88/2009 of Adhur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307 and 109 read with 149 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

2. Consequent on the non-appearance of the petitioners in C.P.No.174/2010 on the file of the J.F.C.M Court-I, Kasaragod non-bailable warrants of arrest are pending against the petitioners. Anticipatory bail cannot be granted to nullify the process issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. There is no reason why the petitioners should not surrender before the Magistrate and seek regular bail. Accordingly, if the petitioners surrender before the Magistrate and file an application for regular bail within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed notwithstanding the pendency of non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioners and also after considering the explanation offered by the petitioners for their previous non-appearance.

3. With the above observation this application is disposed of .