IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5598 of 2009()
1. VIJITH.K., S/O.MADHAVASHETTY.K,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.JIJI
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :18/01/2010
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 5598 of 2009
------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of January, 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 accused
No.5 in Crime No.641/2009 of Kasaragod Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 and 452 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on
10/11/2009, the following order was passed:
“After having heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the
view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an
opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear
before the investigation officer. Accordingly, there will
be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the
investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 18/11/2009 and
19/11/2009.
Post on 25/11/2009. The petitioner shall produce a
B.A. No. 5598/2009
2
copy of the order before the investigating officer.
It is submitted by the learned Pubic Prosecutor
that the petitioner will not be arrested until further
orders in connection with Crime No.641 of 2009 of
Kasaragod Police Station. ”
4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the
petitioner has not complied with the direction contained in the
order dated 10/11/2009. It is also submitted that after
completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the case
on 30/11/2009.
5. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner has
not complied with the direction issued by this Court and also on
the ground that charge sheet was laid in the case, I am of the
view that the Bail Application is not liable to be granted.
Accordingly, the Bail Application is dismissed.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
scm