IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5955 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.256/2009 OF POTHENCODE POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ DILEEP @ PICK-UP ANI, AGED 30, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, THIRUVALLOOR, ANDOORKNAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POTHENCODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. C.I. OF POLICE, KAZHAKKOTTAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5955 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.256 of 2009 of Pothencode Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149 and 332 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act and Section 18(1)(b) read with Sections 38 and 52 of the Kerala Police Act. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 30.10.2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 5th and 6th November, 2009. BA No.5955/2009 2 Post on 12.11.2009. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.256 of 2009 of Pothencode Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram.” 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has not complied with the direction contained in the order dated 30th October, 2009. There is no appearance for the petitioner, inspite of the fact that the Bail Application was passed over on several occasions during the course of the day. The submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor is recorded. Since the petitioner has not complied with the direction contained in the order dated 30.10.2009, I am of the view that he is not entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail application is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl