IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6850 of 2009() ----------------------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ---------------------------------- SANTHOSH, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN, PANGALIL THEKKEKARA PLAVILA VEEDU, KADAMBANADU VILLAGE, KADAMBANADU NORTH MURI, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ENATHU POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6850 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.271 of 2009 of Enathu Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 353, 333 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: On 2.8.2009, at about 2 P.M., while the Sub Inspector of Police and 3 constables of Adoor Police Station were on patrol duty, they got reliable information that two cars were seen parked on the side of the road and that spirit was inside the cars. The police party proceeded to the spot. At that time, the petitioner, who is the first accused shouted to the other six persons in the two cars to kill the S.I. of Police. All of them attacked the police personnel who sustained severe injuries including fracture and head injury. They were admitted in the hospital. Enathu police registered the BA No.6850/2009 2 case as Crime No.271 of 2009 for the offences referred to above. The petitioner apprehends arrest. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in another abkari offence where the allegation is that he transported spirit. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl