IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2981 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO. 177 OF 1981 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT) CMP.2183/2010 of J.M.F.C.-II,KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- PRAKASH KURUP, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRASHEKARA KURUP, THODUVALLY PUTHEN VEEDU, CHADAYAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V. TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 2981 of 2010 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this 27th day of May, 2010. ORDER Petition for bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act. According to prosecution, on 24.11.1981 at about 10 a.m. some country bombs and chopper were seized from the de facto complainant's shop. On enquiry, it was revealed those articles were kept there by first and second accused. Petitioner is the 2nd accused. Hence, a crime was registered against petitioner and another. 3. The trial could not be proceeded with, because petitioner was absent. Petitioner was granted bail in this case, but later he absconded. Hence, non-bailable warrant was issued against etitioner and he was arrested on 9.5.2010. He is in custody since then. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was granted bail but he was forced to go abroad in connection with his job. He came back long back and is permanently residing within the limits of police station but petitioner was not arrested by police and hence he thought that proceedings were over. He ]B.A.No.2981/10] 2 may be granted bail, it is submitted. 5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the submissions made by petitioner's counsel that petitioner was available in the address is not correct. On instruction, it was found that petitioner was not residing within the limits of the police station within which crime is registered or in the address shown by him. He was residing within the limits of Kallambalam Police Station and petitioner could not be arrested since he was absconding. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that petitioner's counsel was not even able to state the stage of the trial before trial court. The case was transferred to long pending case as L.P.No.11/99. The proceedings are at a stand still since petitioner's presence could not be procured. The order by which warrant is issued to petitioner has become final. The said order is not so far challenged. There is nothing to show that the order issuing warrant is illegal. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the discretion exercised by the trial court as per a lawful order. I am satisfied that petitioner may not be available for trial, if bail is granted at this stage. Hence, petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE.