JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner is accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T. No. 2148 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kannur. 2. The petitioner would state that she had never received the statutory demand notice mandated under Section 138 proviso (b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act and further that she has not received any summons from the trial court in this case. It is stated that recently the petitioner could learn that the trial court has now issued a non-bailable warrant against her and that the second respondent (Sub Inspector of Police, Pothencodu Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram), is taking steps to execute the said non-bailable warrant. It is pointed out that the petitioner is a 25 year old married lady who is now five months pregnant and that she has been advised complete bed rest by the doctor as evidenced from Annexure-A medical certificate dated 26.6.2017 issued by a consultant gynecologist. Further evident from Annexure-A medical certificate that the petitioner had suffered four previous abortions and that she has been advised complete bed rest in view of her bleeding problems and preterm contractions. It is further averred that a civil suit filed as O.S. No. 447 of 2013 before the Munsiff Court, Kannur, instituted by the same complainant has already been dismissed by that civil court as per Annexure-B judgment dated 29.10.2015. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the instant private criminal complaint has been filed only after the dismissal of the suit as per Annexure-B judgment. 3. It is stated that the petitioner may be given at least six months’ time to surrender before the trial Magistrate and make applications for grant of bail and recall of non-bailable warrant and that until then coercive steps may be kept in abeyance. Alternatively it is urged by Sri. Shajin S. Hameed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused, that in case this Court is not inclined to take recourse to that course of action, then this Court may direct the second respondent to produce the petitioner before the nearest Magistrate in the event of her arrest in execution of warrant in the above case, as envisaged in Section 81 of the Cr.P.C. 4. Heard Sri. Shajin S. Hameed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and Sri. Heard Sri. Shajin S. Hameed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State authorities. 5. Having regard to the overall facts in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant six months’ time to the petitioner to surrender before the trial Magistrate. The petitioner is now stated to be six months’ pregnant and if the first plea is considered, she must be given another six months' time. That course of action does not appear to be proper or expedient in the facts and circumstances of this case. Accordingly, this Court is prepared to consider the alternate plea made by the petitioner. Sections 78, 79, 80 and 81 of the Cr.P.C. provide as follows: "78. Warrant forwarded for execution outside jurisdiction.- (1) When a warrant is to be executed outside the local jurisdiction of the Court issuing it, such Court may, instead directing the warrant to a police officer within its jurisdiction, forward it by post or otherwise to any Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it is to be executed; and the Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent or Commissioner shall endorse his name thereon, and if practicable, cause it to be executed in the manner hereinbefore provided. (2) The Court issuing a warrant under sub-section (1) shall forward, along with the warrant, the substance of the information against the person to be arrested together with such documents, if any, as may be sufficient to enable the Court acting under section 81 to decide whether bail should or should not be granted to the person. 79. Warrant directed to police officer for execution outside jurisdiction.- (1) When a warrant directed to a police officer is to be executed beyond the local jurisdiction of the Court issuing the same, he shall ordinarily take it for endorsement either to an Executive Magistrate or to a police officer not below the rank of an officer in charge of a police station, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the warrant is to be executed. (2) Such Magistrate or police officer shall endorse his name thereon and such endorsement shall be sufficient authority to the police officer to whom the warrant is directed to execute the same, and the local police shall, if so required, assist such officer in executing such warrant. (2) Such Magistrate or police officer shall endorse his name thereon and such endorsement shall be sufficient authority to the police officer to whom the warrant is directed to execute the same, and the local police shall, if so required, assist such officer in executing such warrant. (3) Whenever there is reason to believe that the delay occasioned by obtaining the endorsement of the Magistrate or police officer within whose local jurisdiction the warrant is to be executed will prevent such execution, the police officer to whom it is directed may execute the same without such endorsement in any place beyond the local jurisdiction of the Court which issued it. 80. Procedure on arrest of person against whom warrant issued.- When a warrant of arrest is executed outside the district in which it was issued, the person arrested shall, unless the Court which issued the warrant is within thirty kilometres of the place of arrest or is nearer than the Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the arrest was made, or unless security is taken under section 71, be taken before such Magistrate or District Superintendent or Commissioner. 81. 81. Procedure by Magistrate before whom such person arrested is brought.- (1) The Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police shall, if the person arrested appears to be the person intended by the Court which issued that warrant, directed his removal in custody to such Court: Provided that, if the offence is bailable and such person is ready and willing to give bail to the satisfaction of such Magistrate, District Superintendent or Commissioner, or a direction has been endorsed under section 71 on the warrant and such person is ready and willing to give the security required by such direction, the Magistrate, the District Superintendent or Commissioner shall take such bail or security, as the case may be, and forward the bond, to the Court which issued the warrant: Provided further that if the offence is a non-bailable one, it shall be lawful for the Chief Judicial Magistrate (subject to the provisions of section 437), or the Sessions Judge, of the district in which the arrest is made on consideration of the information and the documents referred to in sub-section (2) of section 78, to release such person on bail (2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a police officer from taking security under section 71.” Section 78 deals with the situation of warrant forwarded for execution outside the jurisdiction and Section 79 deals with contingencies of the warrant directed to police officer for execution outside the jurisdiction of the warrant issuing court. Section 80 speaks about the procedure on arrest of person against whom warrant is issued. Section 80 stipulates that when a warrant of arrest is executed outside the District in which it was issued, the person arrested shall, unless the court issued the warrant is within thirty kilometres of the place of arrest or is nearer than the Executive Magistrate or the District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the arrest was made, or unless security is taken under Section 71, be taken before such Magistrate or District Magistrate or Commissioner. In this regard before referring to Section 81, it will be also appropriate to refer to the provisions contained in Section 71 which deals with the power to direct security to be taken. "71. In this regard before referring to Section 81, it will be also appropriate to refer to the provisions contained in Section 71 which deals with the power to direct security to be taken. "71. Power to direct security to be taken.- (1) Any Court issuing a warrant for the arrest of any person may in its discretion direct by endorsement on the warrant that, if such person executes a bond with sufficient sureties for his attendance before the Court at a specified time and thereafter until otherwise directed by the Court, the officer to whom the warrant is directed shall take such security and shall release such person from custody. (2) The endorsement shall state:- (a) the number of sureties; (b) the amount in which they and the person for whose arrest the warrant is issued, are to be respectively bound; (c) the time at which he is to attend before the Court. (3) Whenever security is taken under this section, the officer to whom the warrant is directed shall forward the bond to the Court" 6. In the instant case the trial Magistrate, who issued the non-bailable warrant, is the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Thiruvananthapuram Rural Police District which form part of the Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District. Obviously, it is much more than minimum thirty kilometres conceived in Section 80. If that be so, if the trial Magistrate who issued the warrant has made an endorsement on the warrant that if the accused/arrestee executes a bond with sufficient sureties before the Court at a specified time and that thereafter until otherwise directed by that court, the office at whom the warrant is issued shall take such security and release such person from custody. It is not known as to whether such an endorsement has been made in the warrant by the trial Magistrate in this case as contemplated in sub-section (1) of Section 71 and in such a case the bond executed shall be forwarded to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kannur, who is dealing with S.T. No. 2148 of 2016. It is submitted by the learned prosecutor that the telephonic instruction that he could secure is that as on 1.7.2017, the second respondent-Sub Inspector of Police, Pothencode Police Station has not received the non-bailable warrant said to have been issued against the petitioner by the trial court at Kannur. 7. It is submitted by the learned prosecutor that the telephonic instruction that he could secure is that as on 1.7.2017, the second respondent-Sub Inspector of Police, Pothencode Police Station has not received the non-bailable warrant said to have been issued against the petitioner by the trial court at Kannur. 7. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that in case such an endorsement as conceived in sub-section (1) of Section 71 has been endorsed by the trial Magistrate on the non-bailable warrant, then the police officer in Thiruvananthapuram Rural District who is executing the warrant should release the petitioner from custody, in case she executes bond with sufficient sureties for her attendance before the trial court within the specified time as stipulated in the endorsement of the trial Magistrate. In situations not covered by sub section (1) of Section 71, by the mandate of Section 80, the procedure in Section 81 is to be adhered to. Therefore, if such an endorsement as contemplated in sub-section (1) of Section 71 has not been endorsed on the non-bailable warrant by the trial Magistrate, then the warrant executing officer, Thiruvananthpuram Rural District, shall produce the petitioner before the Executive Magistrate or the Superintendent of Police (Rural) of Thiruvananthapuram District and since the offence alleging against the petitioner is only a bailable offence, then she shall be released on bail by such an authority concerned as contemplated in Section 81(1) if it is to the satisfaction of that authority. In such a case, the Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police etc., who is empowered in terms of Section 81(1) shall grant such bail and forward the bond to the trial court which issued the warrant. 8. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner is a 25 years old lady, who is having pregnancy relating complication, it is ordered in the interest of justice that on receiving the non-bailable warrant, the second respondent will duly intimate the petitioner, to appear before him within a reasonable time and the petitioner may be permitted to personally appear before the police officer who has to execute the warrant and then the abovesaid measures as directed herein above may be taken by him. 9. With these observations and directions, the Crl. Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.