IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6718 of 2009 CRIME NO.590 OF 2009 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE PETITIONERS: ACCUSED: -------------------- 1. SATHYAN, 42 YEARS, S/O. BHARATHAN, ARYENTE PARAMBIL (H), VIYYUR AMSOM, KOLLAM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. 2. JAYAN, 40 YEARS, S/O. BHARATHAN, ARAYENTE PARAMBIL (H), VIYYUR AMSOM, KOLLAM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. 3. RAMESAN, 50 YEARS, S/O. BHARATHAN, ARAYENTE PARAMBIL (H), VIYYUR AMSOM,KOLLAM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.TOMY JOHN VETTATH RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH S.I. OF POLICE, KOYILANDI POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 6718 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of January, 2010 O R D E R The petitioner moved an application for anticipatory bail before the learned Sessions Judge, which was dismissed by the order dated 27.10.2009. In paragraphs 6 and 7 of the order, the learned Judge held as follows: “6. Whether the death of Santha was a natural death or she succumbed to the injuries sustained due to the beating of the 3rd petitioner is a question to be revealed during investigation. Anyhow, the investigating officer has not obtained any concrete evidence to implicate the petitioner in the death of Santha. So, as stated by the learned Public Prosecutor, it is premature to pass an order to release the petitioners on bail in case of arrest. 7. The investigating officer has not filed any application in court for altering the offence in the FIR or to continue the investigation of the case. Despite recording the statement of some witnesses the investigating officer has not filed any report in court to incorporate the name of the petitioners in the FIR. In the B.A. NO. 6718 OF 2009 :: 2 :: above circumstances, I am of the opinion that since the investigating officer has not registered any case against the petitioners, it cannot be said that there is chance for the investigating officer to arrest the petitioners. Hence I find no basis for the apprehension of the petitioners that they will be arrested and detained by the investigating officer. So I decline to allow the request of the petitioners for anticipatory bail.” 2. After the Bail Application was argued in detail, when the court expressed the view that there is no reason why the application should be allowed, learned counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the Bail Application with liberty to move an application afresh as and when occasion arises. Permission is granted. Accordingly, the Bail Application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to move afresh as and when occasion arises. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/