IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6868 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 402/2008 OF EZHUKONE POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO:1 -------------------------------------------- PHILIPOSE, S/O.GEEVARGHESE, AGED 49 YEARS,SHIBIN BHAVAN (VADAKKETHIL), MUKKODU P.O., MULAVANA CHERI, EZUKONE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EZHUKONE POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY P.P. SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6868 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 498A, 447, 427 and 34 IPC. According to prosecution, de facto complainant was married to petitioner (A1) in the year 1999 and they have two children in the wedlock. Petitioner is a drunkard, who misappropriated gold ornaments and money, which were given at the time of marriage to petitioner. He has also physically and mentally harassed de facto complainant. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there is no merit in the allegations made and if anticipatory bail is not granted, a chance for settlement will be fizzled out. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is the second petition for anticipatory bail. This Court had rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail to 1st accused who is petitioner herein and granted bail to accused 2 to 6, as per order dated 25-9-2008 in B.A. no.5727/2008. In the said order, this Court had considered the contentions raised by both sides. There is nothing more to be considered now. There is no change of circumstances, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and considering the nature of allegations made against petitioner, I already held that it is not a BA 6868/08 -2- fit case to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner. Nothing is pointed out by learned counsel for petitioner to indicate that he had taken any effort to settle the matter, at least after dismissing the earlier anticipatory bail application. Even though anticipatory petition was dismissed on 25-9-2008, petitioner has been evading the process of investigation and he had not showed any intention to co-operate with the investigation or subject himself to law. The conduct itself is dissuading this Court from granting anticipatory bail. 6. Crime was registered as early as on 2-8-2008 and petitioner is not available for interrogation or investigation. He has not surrendered before the court also. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before Magistrate Court concerned or the Investigating Officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest petitioner at any time and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.