IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2008 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1818 of 2008() ----------------------------- MP.1173/2008 of J.M.F.C.,PARAVUR CRIME NO.94/08 OF NORTH PARAVUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 4 ---------------------------------------------- 1. ROSHAN P.G., S/O.GOPI, AGED 26 YEARS, PULLAYIL VEEDU, EZHIKKARA P.O., NORTH PARAVUR. 2. AVINASH, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, CHEMBAKASSERY, PERUMPADANNA, NORTH PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.94 OF 2008 OF NORTH PARAVUR POLICE STATION). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1818 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for regular bail. The petitioners are accused 1 and 4. They face allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.326 and 307 of the IPC. The crux of the allegations against the petitioners is that on account of prior animosity which the 1st accused had towards the de facto complainant, the accused persons, 5 in number in all, chased the de facto complainant, who was travelling in a car, in motor- cycles and unleashed an attack on him with dangerous weapons including swords. Serious/grievous injuries were suffered by the victim. 2. The alleged incident took place on 20/1/08. The petitioners had come to this Court with applications for anticipatory bail and by a common order dated 4/3/08 in B.A.Nos. 1310 & 1312/08 the anticipatory bail applications B.A. No. 1818 OF 2008 -: 2 :- were dismissed with observations. Accordingly, the petitioners had surrendered before the learned Magistrate on 12/3/08. They continue in custody from that date. Investigation is in progress. Some of the co-accused have not been arrested yet. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the petitioners may now be granted regular bail they having remained in custody from 12/3/08. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that considering the nature of the allegations and the stage of the investigation, the Investigator may be given some further time to complete the investigation. 5. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am satisfied that this is a fit case where the Investigator deserves to be granted reasonable further time to complete the investigation. Appropriate conditions can also be imposed. 6. In the result: (a) This application is allowed. The petitioners shall be released on bail on the following terms and conditions: (i) The petitioners shall not be released from custody on the strength of this order prior to 7/4/08. The Investigator shall, B.A. No. 1818 OF 2008 -: 3 :- in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (ii) The petitioners shall execute bonds for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of three months from the date of their release and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (iv) Except for the purpose of complying with Condition No.(iii) above, the petitioners shall not, during the said period of three months, enter the Sessions Division of Ernakulam without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/