IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1360 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.110/2010 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- 1. JEOTHI, D/O.MUNIYAMMA (AI) DOOR NO.13, JENI THERUVU, KARASAPPETTI, ALAPPPETTI TALUK, THIRUMANGALAM DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. 2. BHAVANI, D/O. THANGAMMA (A2) DOOR NO.13, JENI THERUVU, KARASAPPETTI, ALAPPPETTI TALUK, THIRUMANGALAM DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1360 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.110/2010 of Kilimanoor Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 01/02/2010, while the de facto complainant was travelling in a K.S.R.T.C Bus along with her child, the gold ornaments of the child were stolen. The allegation is that the petitioners committed the theft. They were arrested on 01/02/2010. The gold ornaments were recovered from the possession of accused No.2. The petitioners are in judicial custody. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that charge sheet was filed in the case on 11/2/2010. 5. The petitioners moved for bail before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the first Class-II, Attingal. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application for bail by the order dated B.A. No. 1360 /2010 2 25/02/2010. It is stated in the order that the petitioners belong to Tamil Nadu. If they are released on bail, there is every likelihood of the accused indulging themselves in other offences. It was also held by the learned Magistrate that there is a chance of the petitioners making themselves scarce, if bail is granted to them. However, the learned Magistrate directed the prosecution to complete all the steps within a time frame, so that the case could be disposed of within three months. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are pregnant by five months and that if they are detained further, they would be put to great hardship. Since charge sheet is filed and the learned Magistrate has taken steps to dispose of the case at the earliest, I do not think it would be proper to release the petitioners on bail at this stage. The allegation is that the petitioners committed heinous offence and had stolen the gold ornaments of a kid. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may make themselves scarce. The trial of the case would not be over, if the petitioners were to abscond. The interests of justice would be safeguarded B.A. No. 1360 /2010 3 by directing the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case at the earliest. The learned Magistrate will take steps to expedite the trial. With the above observations, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE Scm