IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7339 of 2008() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.133/08 OF KANNAVAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- K.K.BHASKARAN, S/O.SHANKARAN, AGED 25 YEARS, KALATHUMKANDY HOUSE, VELLI VELICHAM, P.O.MOORIYAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, (S.H.O. KANNAVAM POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7339 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th December, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 5 of the Explosive Substance Act. According to prosecution, the police got information that explosive substances are kept in the house of petitioner and on search, two fuse wires were seized from the house of petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is prepared to co-operate with the investigation and what was seized were only two fuse wires and he is falsely implicated in the crime. He may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the act, if any, committed by petitioner will not fall under the Explosive Substance Act but it may be an offence only under Explosives Act which is bailable. But, it is only with a view to deny bail that offence under the Explosive Substance Act is included. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that fuse wires seized from the house come under the provisions of the Explosive Substance Act. Any material used for BA.7339/08 2 making of explosive substance is also an explosive substance under the Act. Petitioner has no licence or authority to keep any explosive or make any explosive and hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that article seized from petitioner's possession is an “explosive substance” under the Explosive Substance Act and it cannot be strictly said to be an “explosive” as defined under the Explosives Act. 6. On hearing both sides, considering the nature of allegations made, I am not satisfied that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner has not shown any authority to keep the contraband article in his possession. The crime is registered as early as on 18.8.2008 and petitioner was not available for interrogation. Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.