IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4432 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 140/2003 OF VANCHIYOOR POLICE STATION ...................... PETITIONER: -------------------- BABU, S/O. SUKUMARAN, KADUTHARISU VEEDU, ATHIYANNUR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. G.P. SHINOD RESPONDENT: --------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AT THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2009 ALONG WITH B.A.NO. 4433/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.4432 & 4433 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 O R D E R Bail Application No. 4432/2009 arises out of Crime No. 140/2003 of Vanchiyoor Police Station, while Bail Application No. 4433/2009 arises out of Crime No. 26/2007 of Excise Range Chirayinkeezh. Both these applications are under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the same person, namely, Babu @ Sreekanteswaram Babu. 2. Offences alleged against the petitioner in Crime No. 140/2003 are under Sections 8 (2), 55 (a), 57 and 58 of the Abkari Act and Sections 465, 467, 471 and 474 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 16.5.2003, at about 00.40 hours the police party found a red Maruti Omni Van parked on the side of the road. When the police approached, two identifiable persons ran away. On search of the vehicle, a quantity of 665 litres of spirit was found inside the van. Investigation revealed the complicity of the petitioner who was B.A. No.4432 & 4433 of 2009 2 arrayed as a accused No. 1. After identification of the petitioner, a report dated 4.10.2004 was submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police S.B.C.I.D, Thiruvanathapuram before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvanathapuram, wherein the names and addresses of the five accused persons involved in the offences were mentioned. Several persons were questioned and the statements of some of them were recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The investigating agency was fully satisfied on investigation that the petitioner was involved in the offence. However, he could not be arrested as he was absconding. The petitioner was arrested on 17.06.2009 in Crime No.42/2009 (another case) and his formal arrest was recorded in the present case on 23.06.2009. The second accused is still absconding. Apart from the case of illegally transporting large quantity of spirit, there is a further allegation that the registration certificate and other documents in respect of the vehicle are forged and fake . The petitioner is in judicial custody. 4. In crime No. 26/2007 of the Excise Range Chirayinkeezh, offences alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 55(a) and 67 (B) of the Abkari Act. In that case, on 3.5.2009, the Excise B.A. No.4432 & 4433 of 2009 3 Intelligence Wing got secret information that the petitioner, Babu @ Sreekanteswaram Babu was transporting large quantity of spirit in a black coloured Maruti Alto Car. The Excise Party tried to intercept the vehicle. The petitioner tried to escape and after stopping the vehicle he ran away. On inspection of the vehicle, a quantity of 512 litres of spirit was found in the vehicle. The petitioner could not be arrested as he was absconding. As stated above, the petitioner was arrested in connection with Crime No. 42/2009 and his formal arrest was recorded in Crime NO. 26/2007 on 03.07.2009. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the arrest of the petitioner in Crime No. 42/2009, he is included as an accused in all the undetected crimes of a similar nature and that there are no materials to connect him with the two crimes in question. I have perused the Case Diary. I am not at all inclined to accept the contention raised by the petitioner. The complicity of the petitioner in Crime No.140/2003 was reported to the court in 2004 itself and names and addresses of all the accused were furnished by the police before court. On perusal of the Case Diary in Crime No.140/2003, I am of the prima facie opinion that B.A. No.4432 & 4433 of 2009 4 an effective and fruitful investigation was made by the police to find out the real persons involved in the offence. It is necessary to compliment the police for their effective investigation of the case. Prima facie, there are enough materials to come to the conclusion, for the purpose of disposing the Bail Application, that the petitioner is involved in the offence. In cases of this nature, it is not proper to release the petitioner on bail only on the ground that he has spent a few days in judicial custody. From 2003 onwords, the petitioner was making himself not available and allegedly he continued to commit similar offences. Such a person does not deserve any sympathetic consideration in the matter of grant of bail. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is every likelihood of his absconding and making himself scarce. There is also every likelihood that he may indulge in prejudicial activities and commit offence of a similar nature and try to influence or intimidate witnesses. The Bail Applications are accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln