IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6485 of 2009 CRIME NO.250 OF 2004 OF CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED: ---------------------------- P.J.ROY @ PHILIP, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 50 YEARS, PALLIVATHUKKAL VEEDU, NALANCHIRA P.O., ULLUR AMSOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 6485 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.250 of 2004 of Chevayur Police Station, Kozhikode District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 417, 420, 120B, 463, 464, 465 and 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The crime was registered in the year 2004. There are six accused persons involved in the case. The prosecution case is that the accused persons formed a co-operative society under the name and style “Kerala Leather and Plastic Goods Manufacturing Industrial Co-operative Society”. They conducted interview of several persons at Thiruvananthapuram offering employment in the Society and collected huge amounts from the job seekers. Later, they shifted their area of operation to Kakkodi, Kozhikode, where 115 persons were interviewed by them. The allegation is that the petitioner and B.A. NO. 6485 OF 2009 :: 2 :: the other accused collected more than Rs.50 lakhs from the persons who attended the interview. Thereafter, the accused persons were not available and they absconded. The petitioner could be arrested only on 17.10.2009. He was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The investigation is not over. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that if the petitioner is released on bail, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. It is also likely that the petitioner may indulge in activities to intimidate or influence the witnesses and to tamper with the evidence. 5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to accept the contention put forward by the learned Public Prosecutor. The petitioner cannot be released on bail at this stage of the investigation. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/