Sajeev v. Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/13TH ASWINA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 5701 of 2015 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 2200/2015 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT --------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 :

------------------------------------------ SAJEEV, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O GEORGE, CHUTTUMANNIL HOSUE, VALARA P.O., ADIMALI, IDUKKI-685561.

BY ADVS.SRI.C.KHALID SRI.T.V.MAMMOOTTY SRI.V.P.MAHAMMOOD SRI.N.A.JOSEPH SRI.K.P.MOHAMED SHAFI SMT.K.S.HASEENA SRI.PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP SMT.K.REEHA KHADER SMT.K.K.NESNA RESPONDENTS/STATE :

---------------------------------

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682030.

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V.S. SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

bp

A. HARIPRASAD, J.

------------------------------ Bail Appl. No.5701 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of October 2015

O R D E R

Bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.2200 of 2010 of Thrikkakara Police station registered for the offence punishable under Sec.20(b) and (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act. The prosecution allegation is that, on 10.11.2010 at 4.00 p.m., the petitioner along with the co-accused were found travelling in a car, possessing 23.04 kgs of dried ganja. The 1st accused was arrested from the spot and accused nos.2 and 3 ran away. Later, the petitioner was arrested on 25.06.2015. 2nd accused is still evading arrest.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the First Information Statement registered by the Police does not show complicity of the petitioner in the

Bail Appl. No.5701 of 2015 2 crime.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application contending that there are enough materials in the case diary for implicating the accused in this crime. Moreover, the quantity involved is commercial quantity and the petitioner is not entitled now to default bail. The investigation is advancing. The 2nd accused in yet to be arrested.

6. Reckoning the entire facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

In the result, the bail application is dismissed. Sd/- A. HARIPRASAD JUDGE / True Copy / NS/05/10/2015 P.A. To Judge