IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.M.JAMES TUESDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2006 / 27TH ASHADHA,1928 Bail Appl..No. 3984 of 2006 ----------------------------- CMP 5291/2006 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, IRINJALAKKUDA CR.370/2005 of PUTHUKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ SIJU, S/O. NARAYANAN, AGED 23 YEARS, KARIMPANAKKAL HOUSE, EDALAKKADU THAPORE P.O., MOOKKANNUR, ANGAMALI. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR P.N. SUKUMARAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2006, ALONG WITH B.A.4224/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.M.JAMES, J. -------------- B.A.Nos. 3984/06 & 4224/06 ------------------ DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2006 O R D E R The petitioner in both the above bail applications are one and the same person. In B.A.3984/06, he is the first accused, having committed the offence, punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 342, 395 and 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, in crime NO.370/2005 of Puthukkad police station. The arrest of the petitioner was recorded on 17.5.2006, as he was already arrested, in crime No.285/2006 of Chengamanad Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC as well as under Section 25 of the Arms Act, wherein the petitioner is the second accused, for the release of which, the bail application No.4224/2006 is preferred. 2. I heard both the bail applications together. I had gone through the materials that are placed before me. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the B.A.3984/06 & 4224/06 2 petitioner is a known criminal of the area and he is an expert in country bomb making and he is also involved in number of other cases, under the Explosives Act and Explosives Substances Act. The prosecution therefore, submit that the release of the petitioner would be dangerous to the society as well and he may commit the same offence, which he had already committed in the area, on his release on bail. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may not be indefinitely kept in the custody when the investigation being completed, particularly in crime No.370/2005 of Puthukkad Police station, having registered in the year 2005. 4. Considering the materials on record, as submitted, I direct the prosecution to complete the investigation both in crime Nos.370/05 of Puthukkad Police Station as well as crime No.284/2006 of Chengamanadu Police Station, at the earliest, and file the final report in any case within two months from the B.A.3984/06 & 4224/06 3 date of receipt of this order. If any other cases are pending against the petitioners, it should also be expeditely investigated and the final reports filed, so that the petitioner is not kept in the jail, without the legal proceedings, being initiated against him. Both the applications are dismissed. J.M.JAMES JUDGE mrcs