IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 20TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 510 of 2010() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.558/2009 OF SREEKARYAM POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ HARI S/O.SHAJIKUMAR, KATTUVILAKOM VEEDU, GANDHIPURAM, SREEKARYAM TOWN WARD, PANGAPPARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ANIL SMT.R.RAMYA RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------- THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,SREEKARYAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.510 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2010 ORDER This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.558 of 2009 of Sreekaryam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 18.12.2009, at about 6.30 P.M., while the de facto complainant, an old lady aged 61 years, was purchasing articles from a petty shop, the accused persons snatched a gold chain weighing 2.75 sovereigns worth Rs.25,000/- belonging to the de facto complainant. The petitioner was arrested in connection with another crime of Peroorkada Police Station on 22.12.2009 wherein the offences alleged against him was similar in nature. Formal arrest of the petitioner was recorded in the present case on 4.1.2010. 4. The Bail Application is seriously opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is submitted that the petitioner is BA No.510/2010 2 involved in several other cases. If the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to indulge in similar criminal activities. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a young man and he has got a good academic record. That is quite irrelevant in this case. 6. The victim is an aged helpless woman of 61 years. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that she belongs to a poor family. The allegation is that the petitioner, who snatched the gold chain belonging to that poor lady, is also involved in another offence of similar nature. If the petitioner is released on bail, it is most likely that he would indulge in similar criminal activities to the detriment of helpless women. The investigation is not over. For the aforesaid reasons, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl