High Court Kerala High Court

Suresh Kumar @ Sathyan vs State Of Kerala on 5 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Suresh Kumar @ Sathyan vs State Of Kerala on 5 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 509 of 2010()


1. SURESH KUMAR @ SATHYAN,S/O.SREEDHARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SUDHEER

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :05/03/2010

 O R D E R
                          K.T.SANKARAN, J.
            ------------------------------------------------------
                      B.A. NO. 509 OF 2010
            ------------------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 5th 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 fourth accused

in Crime No.643 of 2009 of Vizhinjam Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram District.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 3 and 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing, the learned

Public Prosecutor pointed out that the petitioner along with the third

accused had filed B.A.No.5483 of 2009 for the same relief and that

Bail Application was dismissed by this Court as per the order dated

30.9.2009. On verification, the submission was found to be correct.

4. At that juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner

sought one day’s time to get instructions. Today, an affidavit sworn

to by the petitioner is filed, in which, it is stated that he belongs to a

poor family and that he is a coolie. The circumstances in which it so

B.A. NO.509 OF 2010

:: 2 ::

happened that the dismissal of the earlier Bail Application was not

mentioned in the present Bail Application, have been attempted to

be explained in the affidavit. I am not fully satisfied with the case put

forward by the petitioner for not disclosing the truth in the Bail

Application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to

withdraw the Bail Application in these circumstances. Permission is

granted and the Bail Application is dismissed as withdrawn.

(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge

ahz/