IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5808 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.161/09 OF PERUVANTHANAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS(S): -------------------- 1. P.J. VARGHESE, S/O. JOSEPH, PALLIPURATH HOUSE, KATTAPPANA KARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, DUMPANCHOLA TALUK. 2. JAIBIN VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, PALLIPPURATH HOUSE DO.......... 3. JIBIN VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, } ACCUSED NO.5 PALLIPPURATH HOUSE DO........DO..... } BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5808 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2009 ORDER Apprehending arrest by Peruvanthanam Police in Crime No.161 of 2009 on an accusation of having committed offence under Section 379 IPC, the petitioners have filed this Bail Application under Section 438 of the Crl.P.C. for the grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners 1 and 2, namely, P.J.Varghese and Jaibin Varghese are not involved in the offence and therefore, there is no intention to arrest them. This submission is recorded. The Bail Application has become unnecessary in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 2. 3. It is also submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the third petitioner, namely, Jibin Varghese is accused No.5 in the case. The offence alleged is theft of a motor bike. It is also submitted that the third petitioner is involved in several other theft cases. BA No.5808/2009 2 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity offence and the allegations levelled against the third petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him. The third petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, the Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to the third petitioner. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl