IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 376 of 2009() ---------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.234/1998 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- SUBBAYA PANDI @ PULIYA, S/O. ARUNAGIRI, PANAVADALI SOUTH, SANKARAN KOVIL, THIRUNELVELI, TAMIL NADU. BY ADVS. MR.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN, MR.S.K.SAJU RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I OF POLICE, MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 376 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 454, 461 and 380 read with section 34 IPC. The crime was registered on 24-6- 1998, about 11 years back. Petitioner was not available for arrest and warrants were issued against him. Thereafter,the case was removed to the register of long pending cases. Petitioner was arrested on 3-11-2008. 3. A petition for bail by petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 5-1-2009 in B.A. no.7765/2008, as per Annexure-1 order. The petition was dismissed taking into account the stage of the case and possibility of petitioner to abscond. At that time it was submitted by learned Public Prosecutor that the trial is almost over and only Investigating Officer remains to be examined. Therefore, at the fag end of the trial, this Court was not inclined to grant bail. However, it was specifically observed in that order that dismissal of the petition will not stand in the way of petitioner moving the trial court again for bail and if the learned Magistrate thinks it fit and proper, he may pass order on merits, in accordance with law, depending upon the stage of the case and merits of the case. BA 376/09 -2- 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner has not moved the trial court again for bail, since, according to him, the trial court may not allow petition, as this Court has already dismissed the bail application. It is submitted that petitioner's mother is seriously ill and that 12 more witnesses are to be examined and it is not correct to say that only one witness remains to be examined. 5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is an accused in another case also and the possibility of petitioner absconding cannot be ruled out,. 6. On hearing both sides, I do not find that there is any change in circumstances. Hence, this petition is not maintainable. Further petitioner has not moved the trial court, even though it was left open to him to file an application before the trial court itself. I make it clear that dismissal of this petition will not be a ground to dismiss petition, if any, filed before the trial court. The trial court may dispose of the bail application, if any, filed untrammelled by any of the observations made in this oder, depending upon the stage of the case and on merit. This petition is disposed of . K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.