IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6025 of 2008(C) -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.29/2002 OF VANITHA POLICE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- FATHIMA, D/O. MUHAMMED @ BAGAVAN MUHAMMED, KALIYATHPARAMBU, VELLAYIL, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SMT.T.V.NEEMA RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (REPRESENTING THE S.I OF POLICE VANITHA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.6025 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 109, 366 A, 372, 373, 376(2)(g) and 377 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Petitioner is the 1st accused in the crime. Petitioner was granted bail in this case, originally, on 14.07.2003 but she was absconding for five years, and she surrendered on 02.09.2008. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a lady having three small children and she had to accept a job abroad to look after them and hence, she had left on getting a job visa. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are three accused in the crime, and the case against the two accused is already committed. The case against the petitioner was split up, since she was absconding. If the petitioner is granted bail, it is likely that she may abscond again and not available for trial. On hearing both sides, I find that the petitioner was absent B.A.6025 of 2008 2 for five long years and hence the case against her had to be split and a delay occurred in committal of the case. As per the report of the registry, the case against accused Nos.1 and 3 was committed to Sessions court on 27.09.2008. If bail is granted it is likely that the petitioner may remain absent again and it will protract the committal proceedings. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail at this stage. The committal proceedings shall be concluded by the Magistrate court without delay. The learned Magistrate concerned is directed to commit the case at the earliest to the Sessions court to be tried along with the case of the co-accused. However, the petitioner is at liberty to apply for bail again, before the Sessions court, after it is committed. With these observations, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac