IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2009 / 21ST SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3928 of 2009() ----------------------------------------- CRMP.672/2009 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM CRIME NO.125/2009 OF KAZHAKKUTTOM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/7TH ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SHINU, S/O.P.ABDUL HAMEED, PARAYIL VEEDU, VAILOOR, SASTHAVATTOM, NOW RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.31, NEAR COINGEER, BYPASS ROAD, KAZHAKKUTTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS/ STATE: ------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKKUTTOM POLICE STATION. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 3928 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of August, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the 7th accused in Crime No.125/2009 of Kazhakuttom Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 120B, 302, 201 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is nothing to connect the petitioner with the offences. 4. I have gone through the Case Diary. On perusal of records, prima facie, I am not inclined to accept the contentions put forwarded by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and the allegations levelled against the petitioner and others, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the B.A. No. 3928/2009 Page numbers petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm