IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2009 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2843 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.296/2009 OF HARIPAD POLICE STATION PETITIONERS : -------------------------------- 1. PADMAKSHI, W/O.LATE MANI, AGED 62 YEARS, ANANDAN KATTIL CHIRAYIL, KATTIL MARKET P.O., HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. RAJU, S/O.LATE MANI, AGED 42 YEARS, DO. DO. 3. PRADEEP, S/O.LATE MANI, AGED 37 YEARS, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SURESH (CHIRAKKARA) RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 2843 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of June, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.296/2009 of Haripad Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. As submitted by the petitioner, an attempt was made for settlement of the case and it was referred to the Legal Services Authority. A mediator was appointed by the Kerala Mediation Centre. After discussion with the parties, the mediator reported that the matter could not be settled. 3. I have gone through the allegations made against the petitioners. Various facts were submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners to contend that there was no harassment of the defacto complainant. It is not necessary to consider those contentions in this Bail Application, as any finding on the same is likely to prejudice either party. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of B.A. No. 2843 / 2009 2 the case, the allegations levelled against the petitioners, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm