IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2007 / 16TH BHADRA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 5205 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 151/07 OF PULIKEEZHU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 ---------------------------------------------- 1. PRASANANKUMAR @ PRAKASH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O SREEDARAM, RESIDING AT THODUPARAMPIL VEEDU, PERIYARA MURI, PERIYARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. 2. ANISH M.K., AGED 25 YEARS, S/O SREEDARAN, RESIDING AT THODUPARAMPIL VEEDU, PERIYARA MURI, PERIYARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 5205 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of September, 2007 ORDER Second application for anticipatory bail. When the first application came up for hearing, after detailed discussions at the Bar, the petitioners, who are accused 2 and 3 in a crime registered, inter alia, under Sec.384 of the IPC, had prayed for permission to withdraw the petition without prejudice to their rights to appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail in the ordinary course. That request was accepted and the bail application was dismissed as withdrawn. 2. The petitioners have now come to this Court with an identical prayer for anticipatory bail. An earlier application by the principal accused/the 1st accused for anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court as per the order dated 2/8/07 in B.A.No.4648/07. The facts have been referred to in detail in that order. It is not necessary, in these circumstances, to B.A. No. 5205 OF 2007 -: 2 :- advert to the facts in any greater detail in this order. 3. Suffice it to say that I find absolutely no reason justifying the invocation of the jurisdiction under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. This petition is, accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge