IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7321 of 2009() ---------------------------------- CMP.4541/2009 of J.M.F.C.,KATTAKADA CRIME NO. 328/2006 OF MALAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 : ----------------------------------- SAJI KUMAR @ AMBILI, S/O. SUNDARESAH RESIDING AT VIKKANVILAKATHU VEEDU, CHOOZHAKUTTKOTTA, VILAVOORKAL DESOM, VILAVOORKAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.R.GOPU RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 7321 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.328/2006 of Malayinkeezh Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 21.09.2006, an explosion took place in the cow dung pit in the property of the injured, resulting in partial blindness of the victim. The petitioner was arrested by Tamil Nadu police in connection with a case of transportation of liquor and his formal arrest was recorded in the present case on 03.11.2009. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in Crime No.20/2006 of Karamana Police Station where the offence alleged is under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is also involved in a crime committed in Tamil Nadu. It is also submitted by the learned B.A. No. 7321 of 2009 2 Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is involved in anti social activities in the area. It was pointed out that though the incident took place on 21.09.2006, the formal arrest of the petitioner could be recorded only on 03.11.2009. The investigation is not complete. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it is most likely that he would make himself scarce, tamper with the evidence and intimidate or influence the witnesses. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations levelled against the petitioner in this case and his criminal activities, I am of the view that there is substance in the submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln