IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 5977 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- CRMP.3515/2010 of J.M.F.C., ADOOR. CRIME NO.871/2010 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS 1 AND 2 --------------------------------------------------- 1. PRASAD,AGED 24 YEARS,S/O.SIVANKUTTY, ULAMAYIL LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY,KADACKADU MURI, KURAMBALA VILLAGE,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SIVAN KUTTY,AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.VELU PILLAI,LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY,KADACKADU MURI,KURAMBALA VILLAGE,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,THROUGH THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,PANDALAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V. RAMKUMAR, J. .................................................... Bail Application No. 5977 of 2010 ..................................................... Dated: 30-09-2010 ORDER Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 871 of 2010 of Pandalam Police Station for an offence punishable under Sec. 366 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. seek their enlargement on bail. The petitioners were arrested on 15-09- 2010. 2. The application was opposed on behalf of the prosecution contending inter alia that the first accused who was masquerading as the lover of the 17 year old victim was abducted from her house and two days thereafter the second accused who is none other than the father of A1 had taken the girl out to facilitate A1 to go and stay with the girl elsewhere and which case was originally registered under the caption “man missing” was subsequently converted into the above offence. 3. Having regard to the nature of the allegations levelled B.A. No. 5977 of 2010 -:2:- against the petitioners, the relative conduct of the parties and the other facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioners are released on bail, they will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioners making themselves scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 30th day of September 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani.