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. 5544 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------------ (CRIME NO.375/2010 OF NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- SALIM, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMEDALI RAWTHER, HIGH RANGE HOTEL, NEDUMKANDAM, PERMENTLY RESIDING AT THAZHATHETHIL VEETIL, CHAKKARA VEEDU,MUTTAR BHAGOM, MANGARAM KARA, KOORAMPARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.375/2010 OF NEDUMKIANDAM POLICE STATION, IDUKKI. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. V. RAMKUMAR, J. .................................................... Bail Application No. 5544 of 2010 ..................................................... Dated: 30th September, 2010 ORDER Petitioner who is the first accused in Crime No. 375 of 2010 of Nedumkandam Police Station, Idukki District for and offence punishable under Sec. 489 B & C I.P.C. seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 21-08- 2010. 2. The application was opposed on behalf of the prosecution. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that initially four counterfeit notes of Rs. 500 of denomination and subsequently 12 counterfeits notes of the same denomination were seized from the petitioner and the investigation of the case is still in progress. 3. It is too early to accept the contention of the petitioner that he was not in conscious possession of the counterfeit B.A. No. 5544 of 2010 -:2:- notes. Having regard to the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the relative conduct of the parties and the other facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the 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. Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani.