High Court Kerala High Court

Salimen vs State Of Kerala on 5 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Salimen vs State Of Kerala on 5 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4608 of 2008()


1. SALIMEN, S/O. MUTHUNAYAKOM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SUDHEER

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :05/08/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                    ------------------------------
                       B.A. No.4608 OF 2008
                    ------------------------------
               Dated this the 5th day of August, 2008


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 IPC.

According to the prosecution, the defacto complainant entrusted

the driver of the lorry which belonged to the petitioner to

transport certain asbestos sheet to Kollam. But in furtherance of

common intention of the petitioner, the driver and cleaner the

articles were unloaded at a different place for unlawful gain.

Thereby they allegedly cheated the defacto complainant and a

crime was registered under Section 420 IPC. It is also alleged

that for transporting vehicle, fake registration number plate was

used.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The

only allegation is that the fake number plate was used. The

petitioner was in judicial custody for a very long time. The

petitioner is falsely implicated in the case after a long period. A

crime was registered by the Viyyoor police in the year 2007 and

B.A.4608/2008
2

the petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with the said

crime.

4. This petition is vehemently opposed. Learned Public

Prosecutor pointed out that the petitioner is involved in other

similar crime in which it is alleged that articles were transport to

a destination which is other than what is required by the persons

who engaged the petitioner’s lorry for transporting articles. In the

course of commission of that crime, the Parassala police arrested

the petitioner. As far as this case is concerned, there are

materials in the case diary to show that the petitioner was

present at the place where the article was unloaded, in

contravention of the instructions given by the defacto

complainant. In both cases fake number plates were used with

dishonest intention. The petitioner could not be arrested so far.

On hearing both sides, in an offence of this nature, I am not

inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE

pac