IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 6310 of 2008()
1. NISHANTH K.S.AGED 22 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAJEEV
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :11/11/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A. No. 6310 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 11th day of November,2008
O R D E R
Petition for anticipatory bail.
2. According to prosecution, 1st accused wanted de facto
complainant to give money for conducting his case. Since this
was refused, 1st accused called de facto complainant to come
over to a place and from there, 1st accused and six others
committed decoity. Gold chain and Rs.250/- were taken away
from de facto complainant
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that
petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. He is
the 5th accused in the crime. His name was not mentioned in the
First Information Statement. De facto complainant and accused
are known to each other. There was some difference of opinion
between 1st accused and de facto complainant regarding money
transaction but all other allegations are denied.
4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that crime was registered as early as on 20-3-2007.
Except accused 4 and 5, all other accused were arrested in this
case. Petitioner is 5th accused who was absconding for a very long
time and he has not co-operated with the investigation. There is
nothing on record to substantiate the assertions made on behalf
BA 6310/08 -2-
of petitioner. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is
submitted.
5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature
of allegations made, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory
bail. Petitioner was not available for investigation for a long time.
Petitioner’s name is not mentioned in the First Information
Statement and he was described as a person identifiable by sight.
Hence, petitioner will be required for investigation and
identification. He ha not surrendered to law so far.
Therefore, petitioner is directed to 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
petitioner at any time and proceed in accordance with
law.
With this direction, this petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE.
mn.