High Court Kerala High Court

Rajesh vs State Of Kerala on 12 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
Rajesh vs State Of Kerala on 12 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4362 of 2009()


1. RAJESH, AGED 21 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.GOPAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :12/08/2009

 O R D E R
                          K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                         B.A.No.4362 of 2009
                  ---------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 12th day of August, 2009




                                 ORDER

This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused

in C.R.No.344 of 2009 of Parassala Police Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 457 and 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

3. The prosecution case is that between 10.10 P.M. on

24.6.2009 and 8 A.M. on 25.6.2009, the door of the Amaravila

Excise Range was broke open by some persons and they

committed theft of 296 litres of spirit which was kept in the

office as thondi in Crime Nos.40 of 2009 and 92 of 2008.

4. The petitioner was arrested in connection with Crime

No.423 of 2009 of Neyyattinkara Police Station on 25.6.2009.

The offence alleged against the petitioner in Crime No.423 of

2009 is under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code. It would appear that the petitioner gave a statement

BA No.4362/2009 2

on his arrest in which the theft in the present case was also

indicated. Formal arrest of the petitioner was recorded in the

present case on 3.7.2009. The petitioner is in judicial custody.

5. Learned public prosecutor opposed the Bail

Application. It is submitted that five accused persons are

involved in the case and except the petitioner, no other accused

could be arrested so far. The investigation is at the initial stage.

If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect

the proper investigation of the case. It is also most likely that

the petitioner would make himself scarce and influence or

intimidate the witnesses.

6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case and the submission made by the learned public prosecutor,

I am of the view that it is not proper to release the petitioner on

bail at this stage.

The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl