IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3787 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.282/2008 OF PAVARATTY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS ---------------------------- 1. ILLIAS, AGED 20, S/O. SULAIMAN, PAVURAYIL HOUSE, KURATHIYUR, PUNNAYU VILLAGE. CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 2. SHEMEER, AGED 22, S/O. SULAIMAN, MUTHEDATH HOUSE, PUNNA, MANATHALA, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 3. KAMARUDHEEN @ KAMRU, AGED 23, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, THALAKATH ALANTHRA HOUSE, VENMENAD, PAVARATTY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 4. RASHEED, AGED 39, S/O. ABBAS, THERUVATH HOUSE, VENMENAD, PAVARATTY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT ----------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 3787 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of June, 2008 O R D E R Application for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 120(b), 109, 307 read with section 34 IPC. According to the prosecution, while the defacto- complainant was proceeding on a motor cycle, two persons came in another motor cycle and attacked the defacto-complainant with sword etc., with intention to kill him. The offence was committed in pursuance of a criminal conspiracy with accused 3 and 4. Persons who assaulted the defacto-complainant are accused 1 and 2. Accused 3 and 4 are brought in on the allegation of criminal conspiracy. 3. This application is strongly opposed. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that accused 1 and 2 are involved in other cases. It is also submitted that the incident is in connection with illegal sand mining, in which accused 3 and 4 are involved. They are the master brain behind the incident. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that BA 3787/08 -2- marriage of the 3rd petitioner and his sister was fixed to 22-6-2008 and he was busy in connection with the marriage. The 3rd petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. The learned counsel for the petitioner requests that at least the 3rd petitioner may be granted bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he has no objection in granting bail to the 3rd petitioner on stringent conditions. 6. Hence, the following order is passed:- 1) Request for bail by petitioners 1 and 2 is rejected. 2) The 3rd petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned on the following conditions:- i) The 3rd petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday and Thursday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m., until further orders. ii) The 3rd petitioner shall not leave the limits of the police station, within which the incident occurred except with the previous permission of the Magistrate concerned. BA 3787/08 -3- iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate any witness or get involved in any offence of similar nature and if this condition is violated, bail is liable to be cancelled. The application is partly allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.