Nizar vs State Of Kerala on 8 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4806 of 2008()


1. NIZAR, AGED 26 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :08/08/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                    ------------------------------
                       B.A. No.4806 OF 2008
                    ------------------------------
               Dated this the 8th day of August, 2008


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. According to the prosecution, a motor cycle was stolen

and a complaint was given before the Alappuzha police station.

In the course of the investigation, the petitioner’s brother was

arrested and on questioning, he revealed that he had committed

another offence also, in respect of which a crime was registered

at the Muhamma police station. It was also divulged by him that

actually the petitioner had stolen a motor cycle. Hence, the

petitioner is also implicated as the 1st accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. He used

to advise his brother to abandon the bad company and hence he

had some enimity towards petitioner. But the petitioner is

deliberately implicated in the crime and he has not committed

any offence. It is also pointed out that the petitioner’s brother,

who is a co-accused, was released on bail.

B.A.4806/2008
2

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that the petitioner is involved in another crime also.

The investigation is at the preliminary stage and if the petitioner

is granted anticipatory bail, it will adversely affect the

investigation. Several facts relating to the crime are within the

exclusive knowledge of the petitioner and he is required for

custodial interrogation. It is also submitted by him that the crime

was registered at the Muhamma police station in connection with

this case and was transferred to the Alappuzha police station and

the crime was registered as Crime No.336/2008.

After hearing both sides, I am satisfied that on the facts of

this case, it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
pac