IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6756 of 2009() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.178/2009 OF POZHIYOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3: -------------------------------------- RAMESH AGED 27, S/O. RAFEL, MUDIVILAKAM VEEDU, NEAR MULLASSERI POND, PALUKAL DESOM, PALUKAL VILLAGE, VILAVANCODE TALUK, KANYAKUMARI DIST. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.6756 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.178/2009 of Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120B, 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 20 and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 31/8/2009, while the de facto complainant was returning home after closing his jewellery, along with his friend on a motor bike, he was attacked by the accused persons with deadly weapons and robbed a quantity of 4 kilograms of gold ornaments from the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant sustained injuries and he was admitted in the hospital. The petitioner was arrested on 10/9/2009 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the entire gold jwellery items are not recovered and that the investigation is B.A. No.6756/ 2009 2 in progress. Some of the accused are yet to be arrested. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the finger prints of the petitioner taken by the investigation officer are to be matched with the data base of the finger print bureau to ascertain whether the petitioner is involved in any other similar offence. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the fact that the investigation is not completed, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm