SANTHOSH NATARAJAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The common petitioner in these bail applications is the common 1st accused in C.C.Nos.586/2004, 900/2004, 1011/2004, 476/2005 and 1093/2006 for various offences. In all these cases the petitioner was enlarged on bail. However, consequent on his abscondance, none of these cases could be taken up for trial. His bail was cancelled by the magistrate and non-bailable warrants of arrest were issued against him. It was after strenuous efforts that on 17.11.2006 he was at last arrested and produced before the magistrate. He, thereupon, filed applications for regular bail before the magistrate. All those applications were rejected by the magistrate as per common order dt.11.12.2006 in C.M.P.Nos.9780, 9781, 9784, 9787 and 9790 of 2006. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. It is thereafter that the petitioner has filed these applications for regular bail.

(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor opposed these applications submitting inter alia that the petitioner is a BA.224,226,233,234&236/07 2 known rowdy and is a habitual offender who will flee from justice if released on bail.

(3.) Considering the previous conduct of the petitioner, I am also satisfied that the petitioner will not be available for trial if he is again released on bail. He will definitely flee from justice and none of the aforesaid cases can thereafter be taken up for trial. The learned Magistrate also observed that if the accused is enlarged on bail, he will intimidate the prosecution witnesses. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. These petitions are accordingly dismissed. However, the magistrate shall make an earnest endeavour to dispose of the above C.Cs. expeditiously. If, for any reason, the magistrate finds it not feasible to dispose of the cases within a reasonable time, it shall be open to the petitioner to move the magistrate again for regular bail.