IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3492 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRLMP.4033/2008 of J.M.F.C.-I, PUNALUR CRIME NO.197/2008 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION PETITIONER : 2ND ACCUSED ---------------------------- SUNILKUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS S/O.SISUPALAN, SISU VILASAM, YEROOR P.O. PUNCHIRIMUKKU, YEROOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.SAJIV.C.K. RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANCHAL POLICE STATION, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.3492 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. Petitioner is the accused. A crime is registered against him under Sections 457, 461, 380 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, the accused entered into a shop room of the defacto complainant and committed theft of computer system and accessories of computer. 3. Accused was arrested on 12.5.2008 and he is remanded to custody. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner is required for effecting the recovery. Steps are being taken to recover the article and the investigation reveals that the petitioner has allegedly sold certain articles to a Tamilian. Petitioner's presence is required for the recovery. Another crime is also registered against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. Petitioner is falsely implicated in this case, after the petitioner was arrested in another crime. The incident occurred in 2007 and no purpose will be served in BA.3492/08 2 keeping the petitioner in custody for recovery. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that first accused is already granted bail. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the petitioner is required for the purpose of effecting recovery and sufficient time will be necessary for completing the formalities, since the person to whom the article allegedly sold is not residing within the State. Hence bail cannot be granted at this stage. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.