IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2011 / 7TH BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6465 of 2011 CRMP.2113/2011 of DIST & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO.853 OF 2011 OF CHERTHALA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ RATHEESHKUMAR @ SATHEESHAN, AGED 57 YEARS, PRAVEEN NIVAS, WARD NO.22, THANNEERMUKKAM PANCHAYATH, VARANADU P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SAJEEV SRI.M.V.BAIJU RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.6465 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.853 of 2011 of Cherthala Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 307 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Electricity Act. 3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner and his children are involved in several criminal cases. On 14.7.2011, when the police came to the house of the petitioner it was found that copper wires were placed on the gate and on the trees by the side of the gate and the electricity connection was given to the copper wires. Any person who got contact with the gate or trees would have sustained electrical shock. The BA 6465/2011 2 petitioner apprehends arrest and therefore, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl