IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2010 / 17TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7828 of 2009() ----------------------------- SC.208/2009 OF VI ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO.105/2008 OF POTHANICAD POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- VIPIN, AGED 24 YEARS,S/O.ARAVINDAKSHAN, ALEKUDY HOUSE, ANCHALPETTY BHAGAM, KALAMBOOR KARA, ENANALLOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP (KALLAR) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POTHANICAD POLICE STATION,POTHANICAD, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7828 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2010 ORDER This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.8 in S.C.No.208 of 2009 on the file of the court of the Sixth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120B, 143, 144, 148, 149, 323, 326, 395 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The Sessions Case was posted for trial to 1.12.2009. The posting was made on 8.11.2009. On 1.12.2009, the petitioner did not appear. Therefore, the bail bond was cancelled and notice was issued to the sureties. One of the sureties produced the petitioner before court. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner moved for bail. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the application as per the order dated 17th December, 2009. 4. The learned Sessions Judge took note of the allegation that the petitioner is a member of a goonda gang led by one BA No.7828/2009 2 Veerappan Santhosh. The allegation in the present case is that the accused persons hired the autorickshaw driven by the de facto complainant and without any rhyme or reason, he was brutally attacked by the members of the goonda gang. The learned Sessions Judge also took note of the fact that the petitioner is involved in six crimes registered by Pothanicad police in the year 2008, the numbers of which are given in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Those cases are for the offences of house breaking and robbery. 5. A contention was put forward by the petitioner before the learned Sessions Judge that he had gone to Sabarimala and on the way, he met with a road accident and therefore, he could not appear before court. No materials were placed before the Sessions Court to show that such an accident occurred. Even before this Court, there is nothing to indicate that the petitioner could not appear before court for reasons beyond his control. 6. Mere non appearance on a particular date is not the reason for not granting bail to the petitioner. It was thought that there was deliberate absence which resulted in the splitting up of the case against the petitioner and continuance of the trial BA No.7828/2009 3 against the other accused. It is also to be noticed that the petitioner is also involved in several other cases and that there is every likelihood of the petitioner making himself scarce, if bail is granted to him. 7. I am of the view that the learned Sessions Judge was justified in denying bail to the petitioner. For the same reasons on which bail was refused by the learned Sessions Judge, I am also not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The petitioner can very well move the learned Sessions judge for an early trial of the Sessions Case. With the above observation, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl