IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Bail Appl..No. 3536 of 2009() 1. JITHIN JOSE, AGED 26 YEARS, ... Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ... Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN Dated :06/11/2009 O R D E R K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th 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.1 in Crime No. 168/2009 of Nallalam Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under
Sections 365 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is the following:
The defacto complainant is working in a travel agency, run
by his relative in Wayanad. On 12.04.2009, the defacto
complainant came to Calicut as directed by his employer to give
Rs.1,25,000/- to a travel agency at Ramanattukara. From
Wayanad, the defacto complainant came to Calicut. From the
Bus Stand at Mavoor road, he got into a bus to go to
Ramanattukara. He was told the said bus was not passing
through Ramanattukara. The defacto complainant was directed
to get down at Meenchantha. He got down at Meenchantha. In
order to make a call to his employer, he wanted to get a coin.
B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 2
He got into a shop to purchase cigarettes so that he could get the
changes. At that time, the accused persons came in a Tavera
Car, stopped in front of the shop and forcibly took the defacto
complainant into the vehicle and left the car.
4. The defacto complainant was beaten by the accused
persons and the money in his possession was taken by them.
Thereafter, he was left at Chalapuram in Kozhikode. The car was
found in an abandoned stage in the Calicut city itself. On a search
of the car, Mobile phones belonging to some of the accused
persons, the dress belongs to some of the accused persons and
other articles belongs to other accused persons were found in the
car. The car belongs to another person. The petitioner herein
had driven the car at the relevant time of commission of the
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think
that this is a fit case where Anticipatory Bail can be granted to
the petitioner. The petitioner does not deserve to get the
discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it
B.A. No. 3536 of 2009 3
would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. In
the facts and circumstances, custodial interrogation would be
For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE