IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW THURSDAY, THE28H DAY OF AUGUST20146TH BHADRA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 5539 of 2014 ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 2895/2014 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM .... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1,2 & 4: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUSHEELAN N., AGED45YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, NEDUVELIKKUDI HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA PO., AKANADU, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. K.P. SHIBU, AGED39YEARS, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMA PANICKER, KANICHATTUMALIL PUTHENPURA HOUSE, ELAMBAKAPPALLYP.O. PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
3. SHAJI N.,AGED42YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, NEDUVELIKKUDI HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA P.O., AKANADU, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/STATE: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682 031 (CRIME NO.2895/2014 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT).
2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT683542 (CRIME NO.2895/2014 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA T.Y. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2808-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No.5539 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of August, 2014 ORDER
Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in crime No.2895/2014 of Perumbavoor Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 120B, 143, 144, 147, 148, 307, 427 & 452 r/w. Section 149 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3 (a) of the Explosives Substances Act.
2. It is alleged that on 28.06.2014 at midnight, the petitioners armed with deadly weapons and explosive substances trespassed into the house of the first informant and attempted to commit murder of her husband by assaulting him with the weapons. They committed mischief and caused a huge loss.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations are false and they are not involved in the incident.
4. Heard. B.A. No.5539 of 2014 -2- 5. Admittedly, the husband of the first informant did not sustain any injuries though he was allegedly assaulted with deadly weapons. It is true that there is a statement that he dodged the attack and escaped to the nearby house. The mahazar prepared by the police shows that two articles, which appeared to be some explosive substances were seized from the courtyard. But the statement of the first informant shows that the explosive substance was thrown into the house. So this is a very suspicious circumstance.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the second accused is involved in two other cases. But that cannot be a ground to deny him anticipatory bail. On the facts of the case I am inclined to grant the prayer of the petitioners. In the result, this application is allowed. 1) The petitioners shall be released on bail after interrogation on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if they B.A. No.5539 of 2014 -3- are arrested by the police in connection with this case. 2) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.30 a.m and 11.30 a.m on every Thursday for 6 months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. 3) They shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall they tamper with the evidence. 4) They shall not commit any offence while they are on bail. 5) Each of the petitioners shall deposit Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) in the court of the learned Magistrate before they are released on bail. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law. Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE shg/ //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE