High Court Kerala High Court

Jayachandran vs The State Of Kerala on 4 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jayachandran vs The State Of Kerala on 4 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 7018 of 2009()


1. JAYACHANDRAN, S/O.THANKAPPAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :04/03/2010

 O R D E R
                        K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                      ---------------------------
                      B.A. No. 7018 of 2009
                  ------------------------------------
               Dated this the 4th day of March, 2010


                             O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

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

in Crime No.924/2009 of Cherthala Police Station, Alappuzha

District.

2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under

Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case was registered on the basis of the

information given by the Additional Tahsildar, Cherthala to Circle

Inspector of Police, Cherthala. The Additional Tahsildar stated in

the petition that on 26.10.2009, under the leadership of the

Revenue Divisional Officer, a quantity of about 55 lorry loads of

sand unauthorisedly mined and stored in the property of one

Dinesan were seized. Later, on 31.12.2009, it was found that

about half of the quantity of the sand was removed. During

investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner had removed the

sand.

B.A. No. 7018 /2009 2

4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail

can be granted in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is not

entitled to any discretionary relief under section 438 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner

may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the

petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of

the case.

For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

ln