IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2011 / 29TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8531 of 2011 S.C.(NDPS) NO.3 OF 2010, ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL JUDGE FOR NDPS ACT CASES, THODUPUZHA. PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 ------------------------------------------- MANOHARAN, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 54, NELLIAMKUTHYPULIAMARAM THERUVIL, XXXIII, WARD 35, B.NO. VEEDU, KUMBHAM SOUTH VILLAGE, UTHAMAPALAYAM TALUK, THENI VILLAGE, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.SUMEESH K.S. RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 8531 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.5 in S.C.(NDPS) No.3 of 2010, on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for NDPS Act Cases, Thodupuzha. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 21(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 17.5.2009, accused Nos.1 to 3 were found in possession of 970 grams of hashish oil. They were arrested. The petitioner was granted bail. The case was posted for trial on 12.10.2010. On that day, the petitioner did not appear. No application was also filed by the petitioner to exempt him from appearing before Court. The trial of the case could not be conducted only because of the absence of the petitioner. The BAIL APPL. NO.8531 OF 2011 :: 2 :: petitioner could be arrested only on 22.2.2011. Now the case is posted to 1.11.2011 to 4.11.2011 for examination of the witnesses. The application for bail moved by the petitioner was dismissed by the Special Judge on the ground that if the petitioner is released on bail, he would make himself scarce and flee from justice. The petitioner belongs to a remote place in Tamil Nadu. After granting bail, the petitioner did not appear when the case was posted for taking evidence. The case could not be tried only because of the absence of the petitioner. There was no justification for the absence of the petitioner. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, he would make himself scarce. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The Bail Application is, accordingly, dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/