IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2011 / 2ND POUSHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 10534 of 2011 CRIME NO.263 OF 2011 OF KASABA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.3: ------------------------------ M.L.JOY, S/O.LONAPPAN, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE, P.O.PUTHUR,TRICHUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH PULIMOOTTIL SRI.N.N.ARUN BECHU SRI.ROVIN RODRIGUES RESPONDENT: STATE: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, (KASABA POLICE STATION,PALAKKAD (CRIME NO.262/2011)) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM - 682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 10534 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2011 O R D E R The petitioner filed B.A.No.6439 of 2011 for anticipatory bail for the same relief which is sought for in the present Bail Application. For the sake of convenience, the order dated 12.8.2011 in B.A.No.6439 of 2011 is extracted below: “This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.263 of 2011 of Kasaba Police Station, Palakkad District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. 3. The prosecution case is the following:- On 20/06/2011, based on the secret information that accused Nos.1 and 2 were transporting huge quantity of explosives, the police intercepted the Bolero Jeep in which accused Nos.1 and 2 were travelling. Accused No.2 ran away. Accused No.1 was apprehended. On inspection of BAIL APPL. NO. 10534 OF 2011 :: 2 :: the vehicle, 6000 electronic detonators, 20,000 ordinary detonators and 6980 metres of safety fuse wire were found. Accused No.1 was arrested. During investigation, it was revealed that the explosives were intented for supplying to accused No.3 and that accused No.3 was the person who brought the explosives from Tamil Nadu. Accused No.3 apprehends arrest and therefore he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is on enemical terms with N.A.Thomas who is a license holder of explosives. The explosives were really intented for N.A.Thomas. As between N.A.Thomas and the petitioner there is a civil dispute. Whenever the contraband brought by N.A.Thomas are seized, instructions have been made to implicate the petitioner as the person who brought the contraband. This is happening regularly and that was how the petitioner was implicated in five other cases. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in five other cases of similar nature and he is regularly indulging in transportation of explosive substances from Tamil Nadu to Kerala. 5. Taking into account the nature and gravity of the offences and the quantity of explosives involved, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be BAIL APPL. NO. 10534 OF 2011 :: 3 :: granted. 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.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is suffering from diabetic foot and if he is arrested and detained, he would be put to untold misery and great hardship. Annexure 17 photographs were relied on by the petitioner to show that he is suffering from diabetic foot. Learned counsel submitted that urgent medical attention is required for the petitioner and sometimes, a surgery may be required. 3. The grounds raised in the Bail Application are not sufficient to take a different view from the view taken in B.A.No.6439 of 2011. Illness, age and other factors can be brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner in a petition filed under Section 437 of the Code of BAIL APPL. NO. 10534 OF 2011 :: 4 :: Criminal Procedure. In such an event, the court will certainly consider those aspects while dealing with the application under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. With the above observations, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/