Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE4H DAY OF NOVEMBER201313TH KARTHIKA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 7307 of 2013 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 1706/2013 OF GURUVAYUR POLICE STATION, TRISSUR DISTRICT ------------------------- PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : --------------------------------------- 1. RADHA, AGED55YEARS W/O.DAMODHARAN, POOKKOTTIL HOUSE, KOTTAPADY P.O. CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. RADHA, AGED50YEARS W/O.VELAYUDHAN, GRAMATHIL HOUSE, EDAKKARA P.O. VIA AKALAD, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.RAJIT SRI.LOWEL CHERIAN RESPONDENT/STATE : ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C. RASHEED THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0411-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn P.BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 7307 of 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 04th day of November, 2013 ORDER
Petitioners are accused Nos. 13 and 14 in Crime No.1706 of 2013 of Guruvayur Police Station who are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 354, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. The allegation against the petitioners and others is that when the defacto complainant and her father went to the house of her husband to collect her belongings, they were attacked by accused Nos. 1 to 5 and that when her father tried to intervene, the first accused hit her father with a stick and pushed him down. On the way back, the defacto complainant's father felt chest pain and he died as a result there of.
3. Petitioners would say that they are totally innocent and have been falsely implicated. Even assuming all the B.A. No. 7307/2013 -2- allegations are true, they say that they have no role to play in the incident.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor only pointed out that the investigation is at an infant stage.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and having perused the records, it is seen that there are no roles attributed to the petitioners herein. Even assuming all what the prosecution says is true, there is no reason as to why the petitioners should be denied bail. The petition is allowed as follows:
1. Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 11.11.2013, who, after interrogation, shall produce them before the JFCM court concerned, which court, on an application for bail being moved by the petitioners shall release them on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of ` 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) B.A. No. 7307/2013 -3- with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the said court. 2) The court concerned shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts, before granting bail. 3) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Tuesday between 9.00 am and 10.00 am until further orders. 4) Petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses. 5) If any of the conditions is violated, bail granted to the petitioners shall stand cancelled and the court concerned may take such steps as are available to it in accordance with law. P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds