IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4385 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.251/08 OF PUTHUKKADU POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------- SUBASH, 30 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN NAIR, KRISHNA BHAVAN CHOVVARA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM (CRIME.251/2008 OF PUTHUKKADU POLICE STATION) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appl.No. 4385 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2008. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences is under Section 399 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. According to prosecution, the police got information that 13 persons have assembled in a room in a Bar attached hotel with intention to commit dacoity and, on search of the room, 10 persons were arrested and three persons ran away. Sword, iron rod, knives, chilly powder etc. were seized and it is revealed that they had assembled to commit dacoity. The three persons who ran away from the scene, escaped in a car driven by the 3rd accused, who is the petitioner herein. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. There is a dispute between the employees and the management of the Bar hotel and because of this vengeance a wrong information was given to the police and a false case was registered. Even, according to prosecution case, the petitioner was not arrested from the spot. [B.A.No.4385/08] 2 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the police conducted the search on getting information. Weapons and chilly powder were seized from the room and ten persons were arrested from the spot itself and petitioner is also involved in the offence though he ran away and escaped by driving a Qualis car. Most of the accused in this case are involved in similar other crimes and presence of the petitioner in company of such persons itself is incriminating, it is submitted. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the crime was registered as early as on 5.5.2008 and there is no progress in the investigation and hence petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. Learned Public Prosecutor conceded that though ten persons were arrested and seizure was effected, other persons could not be arrested and the investigation is in a standstill. But, it is mainly because of the pendency of this petition before this Court, at the instance of petitioner from 2.7.2008 onwards, it is submitted. 7. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that on the nature of the allegations and the nature of investigation required, petitioner will be required for interrogation and this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The delay in the investigation, in the circumstances pointed out, cannot be taken as a ground to grant anticipatory bail. [B.A.No.4385/08] 3 Petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within 7 days from today and co-operate with the investigation. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.