IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2008 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4842 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- (CR.NO.761/08 OF GURUVAYUR POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------- JAYAN S/O. SIVASANKARAN, SAROJA VIHAR, AYYATHOLE VILLAGE, DESOM,THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED/STATE: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O. RAMANKUTTY NAIR, KULLATH HOUSE, THAMARAYOO5R, GURUVAYUR, THRISSUR. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JAOCB - R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== Crl.M.C. NO. 4842 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 15th day of December,2008 ORDER This petition is filed under section 439(2) read with section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to cancel the bail granted to the accused in Crime No.761/2008 of Guruvayur Police Station by Sessions Judge, Thrissur in Cr.M.C.2129/2008. The offence alleged against first respondent the third accused in Crime No.761/2008 of Guruvayur Police Station is that he along with the other accused committed offences under sections 420,342,365,465,474 and 506(ii) of IPC read with section 120B IPC. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel is that first respondent is manipulating and doctoring evidence and therefore learned Sessions Judge should not have granted anticipatory bail and the CRMC 4842/2008 2 bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge is to be cancelled. 4. On hearing the counsel and going through the order of the learned Sessions Judge, I find no reason to order cancellation of the bail as sought for by the petitioner. Considering the fact that the offences alleged are under section 420,342,365,465, 474 and 506(ii) of IPC it is not in the interest of criminal administration of justice that first respondent is to be denied the benefit granted under section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure or to cancel the bail as sought for by the petitioner. Crl.M.C is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006