High Court Kerala High Court

Anoop Kumar P. vs The S.H.O on 2 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
Anoop Kumar P. vs The S.H.O on 2 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6276 of 2009()


1. ANOOP KUMAR P.,S/O.MUKUNDAN P.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE S.H.O.,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.K.SREEJITH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :02/11/2009

 O R D E R
                      K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                    ---------------------------
                    B.A. No. 6276 of 2009
                ------------------------------------
           Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009


                           O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused

No.3 in Crime No.266/2009 of Valapattanam Police Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 5 of the Explosive

Substances Act.

3. The Police party conducted a search in the house

belonging to accused No.2 and which was in the occupation of

Accused No.3. On 30.04.2009 accused Nos. 1 and 2 were

arrested. On search of the house, 62 Kgs of gun powder, 117 Kg

of Sulphur, 44 Kgs of Aluminum powder, 250 Kgs of Potassium

Chlorite and 149 explosive substances (referred to as goondus)

were found in the house.

4. Accused No.3 apprehends arrest in connection with the

crime and therefore, this application for Anticipatory Bail has

been filed.

B.A. No. 6276 of 2009 2

5. The offence alleged against the accused persons is

very serious in nature. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner

may be necessary. In the facts and circumstances of the case,

if anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would

adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the

case. I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the

discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is

dismissed.

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

ln