IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4845 of 2009 CRIME NO.74 OF 2009 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION CMP.2936/2009 of C.J.M.,KASARAGOD PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- MUTHAPPA @ SURESH BELEGAR, S/O.PRABHAKAR (LATE), DURGA NIVAS, BRAHMAVAR, GANDHINAGAR, BAIKADY P.O., UDUPI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA. BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENT: --------------- THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2009, ALONG WITH B.A.NOS.4846 AND 4847 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NOS.4845, 4846 & 4847 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th August, 2009 O R D E R In all these Bail Applications, the petitioner is the same person. He has filed these applications for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. B.A.No.4845 of 2009 relates to Crime No.74 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station. The petitioner is the sole accused. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 454, 380 and 461 of the Indian Penal Code. The date of occurrence was on 31.1.2009. The allegation is that the petitioner committed theft of 28 sovereigns of gold, Rs.1.5 lakhs and two torches and thereby caused a loss of Rs.4,30,000/- to the de facto complainant. 3. B.A.No.4846 of 2009 relates to Crime No.157 of 1999 of Manjeshwar Police Station. The petitioner is the second accused in that case. The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 454 and 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. That case relates to theft of a gold chain weighing 1.25 B.A. NOS.4845, 4846 AND 4847 OF 2009 :: 2 :: sovereigns and Rs.3,000/-. The Incident was on 23.6.1999. At that time, the petitioner was a juvenile. 4. B.A.No.4847 of 2009 relates to Crime No.932 of 2008 of Kasaragod Police Station. The petitioner is the second accused in that case. The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 380, 454 and 461 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The date of occurrence was on 4.12.2008. The allegation is that the accused persons committed theft of 39 sovereigns of gold, one pair of silver anklets and Rs.10,000/- from the house of the de facto complainant, thereby causing a total loss of Rs.4 lakhs to him. 5. The petitioner was arrested on 22.7.2009 in Crime No.932 of 2008 of Kasaragod Police Station and his formal arrest was recorded on 4.8.2009 in Crime No.74 of 2009 of Kasaragod Police Station and on 1.8.2009 in Crime No.157 of 1999 of Manjeshwar Police Station. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in four criminal cases in Karanataka State. Out of the said B.A. NOS.4845, 4846 AND 4847 OF 2009 :: 3 :: four cases, three cases involved offences of the nature similar to the offences involved in the present cases. In one case registered in Karnataka State, the allegation is that the accused committed murder. 7. In 1999, when Crime No.157 of 1999 was committed, the petitioner was a juvenile. Later, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner shifted his venue of operation to Karnataka State where he indulged himself in similar criminal activities. Thereafter, he came to Kerala and committed similar offence. If the petitioner is released on bail, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that he would make himself scarce and he would commit offences of similar nature either in Kerala State or in Karnatala State or in both the States. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think, it is safe to release the petitioner on bail. If he is released on bail, it is most likely that he will indulge himself in similar criminal activities. Series of incidents and the nature of the cases revealed that the petitioner has not reformed himself. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, interest of the public at large would be in peril. B.A. NOS.4845, 4846 AND 4847 OF 2009 :: 4 :: For the aforesaid reasons, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The Bail Applications are accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/