IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 9144 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.242/1991 OF NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION SC (NDPS) NO.26/2011 (L.P.NO.4 OF 2002) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 ---------------------------------- KARUTHAKANNAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.SUBBAYYA THEVAR, HOUSE NO.17, WARD NO.II, BHADRAKALI THERUVU, CUMBUM VILLAGE, UTHAMAPALAYAM, MADHURAI. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.DIPU JAMES SRI.K.P.UNNIKRISHNAN (ELOOR) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RASHEED THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.9144 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of November, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the fifth accused in Crime No.242 of 1991 of Nedumkandam Police Station. 2. The allegation made against the petitioner is that on 11.9.1991, he along with other accused were found in possession of 14.5 kgs. of ganja. The petitioner was granted bail after undergoing judicial custody for some time. However, he did not appear before court and the case was treated as long pending case. The petitioner could be arrested only in September, 2011. The Bail Application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Special Judge for NDPS Act Cases, Thodupuzha, by the order dated 22nd September, 2011. The learned Special Judge held thus : “3. After the judicial custody for a long period, all the accused were released on bail, BA 9144/11 2 at the crime stage, by my learned predecessor in office. After the filing of charge sheet against all the accused, none of them appeared before this court on summons. In spite of coercive steps and steps under Sections 82 and 83 of Crl.P.C. and initiation of proceedings against the sureties under Section 446 Crl.P.C., none of the accused could be apprehended. After complying with the necessary procedures and formalities my learned predecessor in office transferred the case against all the accused to the register of long pending cases as L.P.4/2002. Thereupon non bailable warrants were repeatedly issued against all the accused periodically. While so, the petitioner/third accused was apprehended and produced. He was remanded to judicial custody. Thereupon the case against him was refiled as the present SC (NDPS) 26/11. The present application for bail moved by him is to be appreciated in the above backdrop.” 3. The petitioner was not available for 17 years and the trial of the case could not be completed only because of the non appearance of the petitioner. It would be highly improper, if the petitioner is released on bail during the pendency of the trial. BA 9144/11 3 This is an old case and the court will expedite the trial of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl