IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3398 of 2009() ----------------------------- SC.1688/2008 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- ARUN, S/O.SATHYAN, KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU, NEAR MULLUVILA GROUND, ATTIPARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ B.A.No.3398 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009 ORDER This is an application for regular bail filed by the accused in Sessions Case No.1688 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 341, and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioner was granted bail at the investigation stage of the case. It is submitted by the public prosecutor that while on bail, the petitioner committed another offence. Thereafter, the petitioner did not appear before court. The case against him was split up as he was absconding. Later, he was arrested and produced before court. 4. The petitioner moved for bail. That was not granted. He filed a Bail application before the High Court. That Bail Application was dismissed with an observation that the petitioner may move another Bail Application later before the trial court. BA No.3398/2009 2 The petitioner thus moved an application for bail. That was allowed on condition that the petitioner should report before the C.I. of Police on every alternate day. It is stated that the petitioner complied with the conditions till 20.3.2009. Thereafter, he did not report before the police. Warrant for arrest was issued. He was arrested on 15.5.2009. The petitioner moved an application for bail. That application was dismissed by the court below by Annexure C order dated 23rd May 2009. 5. The learned public prosecutor submits that the petitioner is involved in several other cases including one murder case apart from the murder case in which case he is facing trial. The petitioner did not comply with the conditions imposed while granting bail. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was under treatment for quite sometime. The court below accepted the case of the petitioner that from 22.3.2009 to 23.3.2009, he was under the treatment in the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, and that from 25.3.2009 to 22.4.2009 he was an inpatient in the Government Ayurveda College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. Even after BA No.3398/2009 3 discharge from the hospital on 22.4.2009, he did not report before the police. Hence, warrant for arrest was issued by the court on 29.4.2009. The Sub Inspector of Police could not execute the warrant as the petitioner was not found at his residence. Later, on 15.5.2009, he was arrested. 6. The court below did not accept the explanation given by the petitioner for his non appearance before the police. The petitioner was absconding at the trial stage. Later, bail was granted. He did not comply with the conditions granting bail. Even while on bail, he committed other offences. In these circumstances, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get bail. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl