IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2010 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1387 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.287/2007 OF PALA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ BINCE M.J. MULACKAL VEEDU, PAYAPPAR KARA, LALAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.KISHOR B. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1387 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of March, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the third accused in S.C.No.165/2009 on the file of the court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc-I), Kottayam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120B and 308 of the Indian penal Code. 3. It would appear that all the correct facts are not stated in the Bail Application. The order dated 27/10/2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge also does not disclose all the relevant facts. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that during the crime stage, the petitioner was arrested. The crime was registered as Crime No.287/2007 of Pala Police Station. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that on 18/10/2008, the petitioner was released on bail. The charge sheet was filed subsequently. It is not clear whether the petitioner absconded during the committal stage or after the committal while the B.A. No. 1387/2010 2 matter was pending before the Sessions Court. Anyhow, the petitioner absconded and a non-bailable warrant was issued against him. The petitioner was arrested in Crime No.126/2009 of Pandalam Police Station and on production warrant, he was produced before the court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc-I), Kottayam. The petitioner moved for bail. That application was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge by the order dated 27/10/2009. 5. The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge discloses that the petitioner is involved in three other cases, one under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, another for an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and yet another case under Section 8(1)(2) of the Abkari Act. The learned Sessions Judge also held that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of his absconding. The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge also reveals that the case was posted for trial and that if the petitioner is released on bail, it would affect the day today trial of the case. 6. At this stage, I do not think it is proper to release the B.A. No. 1387/2010 3 petitioner on bail. The matter is now pending before the learned Sessions Judge and the case is scheduled for trial. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is every likelihood of the petitioner absconding again. The petitioner is involved in four cases, where the allegation is that he has committed serious crimes. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm