IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 7494 of 2010() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/09/2010 IN MP.4025/2010 IN CC.808/2010 of J.M.F.C.-I,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER/FIRST ACCUSED: -------------------- RINTO, S/O.KOCHAPPU, CHERUVALKARAN HOUSE, KALLUR DESOM, KALLUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SATHEESA BABU RESPONDENT:COMPLAINANT --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHERPU POLICE STATION, CHERPU, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.7494 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2010 ORDER The petitioner, who is accused No.1 in Crime No.298 of 2009 of Cherpu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323, 326, 342, 365, 392 & 506(ii) read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 14/09/2010. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the petitioner who is a notorious criminal is involved in three other cases involving Sec.395, one case involving an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and one case involving Section 307 I.P.C. and the other case involving an offence under the Arms Act. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the relative conduct of the parties, the extent of the injury sustained, the propensities of the petitioner, the sentiments of the near relatives of the victim and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the Bail Appln.No.7494/2010 : 2 : prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioner making himself scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj