MAMMUNNI MAMMYKUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS who are accused Nos.1 and 3 in C.C.No.264/2002 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Tirur, for an offence punishable under sec.498A r/w. sec.34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners the trial of the case (C.C.264/02) is yet to begin and the case stood posted to 13.11.2006 on which day the petitioners could not be present before court for the reason that they had to participate in a religious function in connection with the death anniversary of the father of the 2nd petitioner. The petitioners would, therefore, submit that an application to excuse their absence on that day was duly filed, but the same was rejected and bail was cancelled and warrant has been issued against them. If the trial of the case is yet to begin, the petitioners' absence on 13.11.2006 could have been excused. Now that non-bailable warrant of arrest is issued against the petitioners, I am not inclined to nullify the same by the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. But, at the same time, I am of the view that the petitioners should be given an opportunity to seek regular bail from the trial court. ACCORDINGly, if the petitioners surrender before the trial court 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 after examining the explanation offered by the petitioners for their previous non-appearance, having due regard to the fact that the trial of the case is yet to begin. This petition is dismissed.