IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2420 of 2009 CRIME NO.62 OF 2009 OF KUTHIATHODE POLICE STATION CRMP.1098/2009 of SESSIONS COURT (VACATION JUDGE), ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER: ------------------- ANILKUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. THANKAPPAN, KANDEKATTU, EZHUPUNNA P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUTHIATHODE POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 2420 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st May, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner, who is the second accused in Crime No.62 of 2009 of Kuthiathode Police Station, Alappuzha District, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution alleges offence under Sections 420 and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is that the petitioner along with the first accused approached the de facto complainant, who is conducting a travelling agency, and hired three cars on monthly rent. Thereafter, the accused pledged the cars to some others for gaining unlawful profit. The first accused was arrested. He was in custody for some time and he was granted regular bail. The petitioner moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Vacation Judge, Alappuzha as Crl.M.P.No.1098 of 2009. That application was dismissed on 21.4.2009. The learned Vacation Judge held that the CD file reveals that prima facie there are sufficient materials justifying the implication of the petitioner in the case. B.A. NO.2420 OF 2009 :: 2 :: In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner can invoke the relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/