IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 6731 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.461/2006 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RENUMBERED AS CBCID CRIME NO.335/2006 --------------------------------- PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ RAVEENDRANATH @ MOHANAN, UT NO.8161, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT JAIL, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. SUDHAKARAN, PAZHAVILA VEEDU, VENGANOOR DESOM, VIZHINJAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SUJIT KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, CBCID, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL, ATTAKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dmb V. RAMKUMAR, J. .................................. Bail Application No. 6731 of 2010 ..................................................... Dated: 3rd day of November, 2010 ORDER Petitioner, who is the 5th accused in Crime No.335/2006 of CB CID, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Section 489 (A) (B) (C) (D) of I.P.C., seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 28.9.2010. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter-alia that the counterfeit notes were manufactured by A4 using the printer supplied by the petitioner (A5) and A3 who is none other than the petitioner's son initially released the fake notes to A1 and A2. Investigation of the case is still in the preliminary stage. The ramifications of the racket have not yet been fully probed by the investigating agency. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the relative conduct of the parties, the extent of the injury sustained, the propensities of the petitioner and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the Bail Application No. 6731 of 2010 2 petitioner making himself scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) dmb