IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7878 of 2008(B) ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.1606/2008 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3 : ------------------------------------------------ 1. RAHUL RAJAN, AGED 22 YEARS S/O.RAJAN, EMBRAMADATHIL HOUSE KUTHUKUZHI PO, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. AJESH MOHAN, AGED 20 YEARS S/O.MOHAN,NEDUMBAGATH HOUSE, KUTHKUZHI P.O. KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I.OF POLICE KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.7878 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 511 of 380 and 34 of I.P.C. According to prosecution, on 14.12.2008, petitioners (accused nos.2 and 3) along with first accused committed theft of a stereo from the car belonged to the defacto complainant. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant and his friends were travelling in a car in a drunken state. It happened to hit against another vehicle and people of the locality gathered and the defacto complainant was intercepted. The police was informed and he was taken to the police station. On the next day, at 5 a.m. in the morning, defacto complainant came to the scene again and he was trying to take away the vehicle, while he allegedly found 3 persons sitting in the car and attempting to remove the stereo, is the allegation. 4. But according to petitioners, when the defacto complainant came early in the morning to take the car, people B.A.No.7878 of 2008 2 of the locality thought that he was clandestinely removing the car without any authority but the defacto complainant had, in the meantime, obtained bail from the police station and he had come to take the car. Therefore, there was some altercation between the people of the locality and the defacto complainant and because of this, petitioners are falsely implicated in the case and they are absolutely innocent of the allegations made. First accused was already granted bail. Second accused is not involved in any other case. It is also submitted that this petition was filed on 19.12.2008. 5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that names of petitioners are not mentioned in the F.I. Statement. because they are not known to the defacto complainant. But, as per the materials available in the case diary, petitioners are involved in the offence. It is pointed out that third accused is involved in other theft cases and he has criminal antecedents. Therefore, it is not correct to say that they have not committed the offences, as alleged. On hearing both sides and on considering the nature of offence committed, I do not find it fit to grant anticipatory bail. B.A.No.7878 of 2008 3 The crime was registered on 15.12.2008. Petitioners are bound to appear before the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate court concerned and co-operate with the investigation. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate court concerned without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them and proceed in accordance with law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac