IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 238 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ (CRIME NO. NOT KNOWN OF NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FORT, POOVAR AND VIZHINJAM POLIC STATIONS) PETITIONER(S): NOT AN ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------ ANEESH KUMAR @ ANEESH S/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 24 YEARS, KIZHAKKETHATTU PUTHEN VEEDU,AVANAKUZHI, MANALIVILA, THANNIMOODU PO,NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADVS. SRI.PRATHEESH.P., SRI. K.SIJU. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FORT POLICE STATION. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOVAR POLICE STATION. R1 TO R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. HEMA, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 238 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The crime numbers are not mentioned in the petition. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is involved in two crimes alleging offence under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Petitioner is accused no.1 in Crime no. 279/2009 of Neyyattinkara police station. As per the allegations in that crime petitioner(A1) along with second accused committed theft of an autorickshaw and sold it to third accused. The other case is Crime no. 260/2009 of Vizhinjam Police Station wherein petitioner is third accused and he along with first and second accused committed theft of an autorickshaw and sold it to 4th accused. In both cases, one of the co-accused is arrested and it is revealed on investigation that petitioner also committed the offence. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations made. One Manu brought an autorickshaw into the work shop for repairing and also painting. Petitioner is not involved in any offence, it is submitted. 5. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor B.A. No. 238 / 2010 2 submitted that in both the crimes, the vehicle could not be seized. In Crime no. 260/2009, third accused was arrested and co-accused including petitioner are yet to be arrested and autorickshaw is also to be seized. For the purpose of recovery, custodial interrogation of petitioner is absolutely necessary. The crimes are registered as early as in 2009 and petitioner is not available for arrest, it is submitted. 6. On hearing both sides, petitioner is required for custodial interrogation for recovery of the vehicle and for an effective investigation. If anticipatory bail is granted, it will adversely affect the investigation. The crime is registered as early as in 2009. Considering the nature of the allegations made and nature of investigation, I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner is bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation. 1. Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer without any delay. 2. No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in Crime no. 279/2009 of Neyyattinkara Police Station or Crime no. 260/2009 of Vizhinjam Police Station will be entertained by this Court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln