IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5827 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.942/2009 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. ASHWIN RAJ, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.RAJAPPAN, RAJ BHAVAN, NANNUVAKKADU, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SUDHA, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.LATE RAJAPPAN, RAJ BHAVAN, NANNUVAKKADU, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5827 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.942 of 2009 of Pathanamthitta Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 13.10.2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 19th and 20th October, 2009. Post on 23.10.2009. It is submitted by the learned Public BA No.5827/2009 2 Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.942 of 2009 of Pathanamthitta Police Station.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not complied with the order dated 13th October 2009. 5. Since the petitioners have not complied with the order dated 13th October 2009, I do not think that they are entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl