IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3536 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO. 168/2009 OF NALLALAM POLICE STATION ....................... APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.2 : ------------------------------------------ JITHIN JOSE, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.JOSE, KAPPIYARUMALAYIL HOUSE, KUTTAMANGALAM AMSOM DESOM, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of November, 2009 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. 168/2009 of Nallalam Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 365 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The defacto complainant is working in a travel agency, run by his relative in Wayanad. On 12.04.2009, the defacto complainant came to Calicut as directed by his employer to give Rs.1,25,000/- to a travel agency at Ramanattukara. From Wayanad, the defacto complainant came to Calicut. From the Bus Stand at Mavoor road, he got into a bus to go to Ramanattukara. He was told the said bus was not passing through Ramanattukara. The defacto complainant was directed to get down at Meenchantha. He got down at Meenchantha. In order to make a call to his employer, he wanted to get a coin. B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 2 He got into a shop to purchase cigarettes so that he could get the changes. At that time, the accused persons came in a Tavera Car, stopped in front of the shop and forcibly took the defacto complainant into the vehicle and left the car. 4. The defacto complainant was beaten by the accused persons and the money in his possession was taken by them. Thereafter, he was left at Chalapuram in Kozhikode. The car was found in an abandoned stage in the Calicut city itself. On a search of the car, Mobile phones belonging to some of the accused persons, the dress belongs to some of the accused persons and other articles belongs to other accused persons were found in the car. The car belongs to another person. The petitioner herein had driven the car at the relevant time of commission of the offence. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that this is a fit case where Anticipatory Bail can be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner does not deserve to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 3 would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. In the facts and circumstances, custodial interrogation would be required. For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln