IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 9549 of 2011() ----------------------------- CMP.1374/2011 of J.M.F.C.-I, ALUVA Crime No.1290 of 2011 of Aluva Police Station. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 2 --------------------------------------------- 1. PRAMOD, S/O.HARIHARAN, PALLIMOLLATH HOUSE, PALLIKKARA, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SHERIF, S/O.INSUKUTTY, THEKKETHIL HOUSE, C/O.SHAMEER, PATHADIPALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY.P.P.SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------- B.A.No. 9549 OF 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.1290 of 2011 of Aluva Police Station. 2.The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.The prosecution case is that on 7.5.2011 at 10 AM, the accused persons came on a motor bike and snatched a gold chain weighing 1.5 sovereigns from a pedestrian lady. 4.The petitioners were arrested on 3.8.2011. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the B.A.No.9549 OF 2011 2 petitioners are accused in 9 theft cases registered in different Police Stations. It is submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the final report was filed in the case. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners in spite of the fact that charge sheet was filed. The petitioners are involved in 9 other cases of similar nature. If they are released on bail, it is most likely that they would involve in similar criminal activities to the detriment of the general public. It is also likely that the petitioners may make themselves scarce and flee from justice. The court having jurisdiction shall try and dispose of the case expeditiously, taking into account the fact that the petitioners are in judicial custody. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE cms