IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 508 of 2010 CRIME NO.496 OF 2009 OF KAZHAKUTTOM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3: --------------------------------- ARUN, S/O. BABU, ARUNALAYAM, PERUMANCHIRA, PONGARA, KAZHAKUTTOM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT: --------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 508 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of February, 2010 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.496 of 2009 of Kazhakuttom Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 457, 461 and 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that in August 2009, the petitioner along with other accused trespassed into the shop belonging to the de facto complainant during mid night by breaking open the lock of the shutter of the shop and committed theft of mobile recharge coupons and cash. The petitioner was arrested in connection with Crime No.332 of 2009 on 21.9.2009. His formal arrest was recorded in the present case on 23.9.2009. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. B.A. NO.508 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 4. The petitioner filed an application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, which was dismissed by the order dated 21.11.2009. The learned Sessions Judge held that if the petitioner is released on bail, he would indulge in similar crimes. The petitioner filed another application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, which was also dismissed by the order dated 22.12.2009. As per that order, the learned Sessions Judge directed the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case within a period of four months, charge sheet having been filed by the investigating officer. 5. The petitioner is involved in Crime No.332 of 2009 and 495 of 2009 as well, where the offences involved are of similar nature. That would indicate that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to commit similar offences. The learned Sessions Judge was right in taking the view that bail cannot be granted to the petitioner till the trial is over. 6. I am also of the view that the petitioner cannot be released on bail at this stage. The learned Sessions Judge has directed the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case within four months. B.A. NO.508 OF 2010 :: 3 :: Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner that he would be detained indefinitely is unsustainable. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/