IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2009 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2682 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CRIME NO.126/09 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED : ----------------------------------- A.N. HARIKUMAR, S/O. NAGENDRAN, AGED 32 YEARS, TC 21/2027-I, LAXMAN, SHASTHA KOIL STREET KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SRI.A.S.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 2682 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the 3rd accused in Crime No.126/2009 of Medical College Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are under sections120(B), 212, 436, 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act. 2. Accused 1 and 2 were arrested and they are in Judicial Custody. The 2nd accused is the brother-in-law of the first accused. The 4th accused is wife of the accused no.1 and she is absconding. The investigation of the case is not over. 3. The defacto complainant is the Assistant Commissioner of Police who was involved in the investigation of a scam, which is popularly known as “Total for you scam”. The prosecution case is that due to enmity of the accused towards the defacto complainant, on 25/02/2009 at 2.15 A.M, the accused persons trespassed into the residence of the defacto B.A. No. 2682/ 2009 2 complainant and hurled petrol bombs and damaged a Santro car belonging to him and caused loss to a tune of Rs.7,00,000/-. 4. The petitioner moved an application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, which was dismissed along with the Bail Application submitted by some other accused, by the order dated 2/03/2009. 5. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be released on bail at present as the investigation of the case is not over and since all other accused are not arrested. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect proper investigation of the case. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, who was working in a news channel, even removed his computer hard disk in order to destroy evidence. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm