IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 426 of 2011(A) ---------------------------------------- [CRIME NO.792/2010 OF THE KALPETTA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT] .......... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.16: -------------------------------------------- ABDURAHIMAN.C,S/O.UNNEEN,CHERUMALA HOUSE, PALEMADU,VAZHIKKADAVU,EDAKKARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR. RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTELD BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,KALPETTA POLICE STATION- THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K. SURESH. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. V.RAMKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.426 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011 ORDER The petitioner, who is accused No.16 in Crime No.792 of 2010 of Kalpetta Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 & 120B read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 20/12/2010. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the petitioner had acted as a middleman in unlawfully securing employment in Government service on the strength of false advise memos purportedly issued by Kerala Public Service Commission for enabling A7 and A8 to secure employment in the Revenue Department in Wayanad District and the petitioner had also shared a portion out of the sum of Rupees Eight lakhs received from each of the candidates. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, Bail Appln.No.426/2011 : 2 : the relative conduct of the parties, the propensities of the petitioner and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioner making himself scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj