IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5410 of 2011 CRIME NO.1615/2011 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ M.M.ABDUL MANAF,S/O.MAMMU,HOUSE NO.8/277 MURIYANKARA HOUSE, NOW R/AT SANTHI LANE, CHURCH ROAD,CHITTOOR,VADUTHALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 682 023. BY ADV. SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALEESSERIL) SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA (REPRESENTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM,CR 1615/2011 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM),REP.BY THE STATE PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 5410 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.1615 of 2011 of the Central Police Station, Ernakulam. 2. The offence alleged against the accused is under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 16.9.2010, a gold chain belonging to the de facto complainant, who was an inmate in a hostel in which the petitioner was working as the Manager, was stolen by the petitioner and entrusted to the second accused, who was working as the cook in the hostel. The second accused pledged the ornament with a financier. It is stated that the second accused was arrested and produced before Court. It is submitted that the second accused is on bail now. BAIL APPL. NO.5410 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted. If anticipatory bail is granted, it would adversely affect the smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/