IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2009 / 15TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5711 of 2009() --------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.1304/2009 Dated 19/03/2009 SC 885/2006 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, VADAKARA .................... PETITIONER/6TH ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ P.U.JOSE @ JOSEPH, S/O.JOHNY ULAHANNAN, PULPPARAMBIL HOUSE, BATHERY AMSOM DESOM, WAYNAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 5711 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.6 in S.C No. 885/2006 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Special Court (NDPS Act Cases) Vadakara. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 326, 307, 302, 124 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioner was granted bail by the High Court. He was released on bail on 15/12/2006. But he failed to appear before the court thereafter. He was arrested on 29/3/2008 in connection with another case. He was produced in the present case on production warrant, on 7/04/2008. The petitioner moved an application for bail. That application was dismissed. He moved B.A. No.7929/2008 before the High Court. That Bail Application was dismissed by the order dated 12/01/2009. However, it was observed that if there was any delay in disposal of the case, the petitioner can apply for bail before the trial court. The petitioner B.A. No. 5711/2009 2 filed an application for bail before the Sessions Court. That application was dismissed by the order dated 10/8/2009. 4. It has come out that while on bail in the present case, the petitioner committed various offences. He was arrested in a case, where the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was alleged. While he was being taken to the court, he escaped from the police custody. He is also involved in a case, where the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged. It is also alleged that he committed offences under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act while he was on bail in the present case. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that 122 witnesses were examined in the case. The trial is progressing. As rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is every likelihood of the petitioner absconding and making himself scarce. It is also important to note that while the petitioner was on bail in the present case, it is alleged that he committed several offences. B.A. No. 5711/2009 3 In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm