IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 6293 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.577/10 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION,KANNUR DISTRICT) ..... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 & 3: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. RASIK K. @ THAVALA RASIK, S/O.KAMAL, AGED 27 YEARS, KODIYIL HOUSE, HIGHWAY, TALIPARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. ANVAR P.V., S/O.HAMSA, AGED 23 YEARS, PALLI VALAPPIL HOUSE, TALIPARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- STATE, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S. HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.6293 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 ORDER The petitioners, who are accused Nos.2 & 3 in Crime No.577 of 2010 of Taliparamba Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 395 I.P.C., seek their enlargement on bail. The occurrence took place on 03/08/2010. The petitioners were arrested on 27/09/2010. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the accused persons including the petitioners took away the laptop and jeep of the de facto complainant on 3/8/2010 and the petitioners were apprehended only on 27/9/2010. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offence, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners, the relative conduct of the parties, the extent of the injury sustained, the propensities of the petitioners, 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 petitioners are released on bail, they will definitely influence and intimidate the Bail Appln.No.6293/2010 : 2 : prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioners making themselves scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj