IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4060 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.106 OF 2008 OF NEYYAR DAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS - ACCUSED A1 TO A4 ----------------------------------------------- 1. SHAMAD, AGED 23, S/O.HAMSA, NARAKATHINMOODU VEEDU, KOTTOOR, MANNOOKKARA DESOM, MANNOOKKARA VILLAGE. 2. SHIBU, AGED 23, S/O.SUBYRE, KIZHAKKEKARA ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, NEAR KOTTOOR AYURVEDA HOSPITAL, MANNOOKKARA DESOM, MANNOOKKARA VILLAGE. 3. MANSOOR, AGED 23, S/O.MAHIN, KOTTOOR MANGLOW VEEDU, MANNOORKKARA DESOM, MANNOOKKARA VILLAGE. 4. SHAJI, AGED 26, S/O.AHAMED SALI, SHIBILA MANZIL, KANDAKATHILCHIRA, KOTTOOR, MANNOORKKARA DESOM, MANNOORKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 4060 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324 and 308 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Petitioners are the accused 1 to 4. According to prosecution, petitioners, along with others, formed in an unlawful assembly and waylaid the de facto complainant coming in a motor bike with an auto rickshaw on 10.5.2008 and assaulted him using deadly weapons. The de facto complainant evaded the attack. Still he sustained some injuries. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the fourth accused was attacked by the de facto complainant and others about five months prior to the date of occurrence and this case is falsely foisted against the petitioners. No injury was sustained and if the incident had occurred as alleged, some serious injuries would have been sustained by the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant is a habitual offender involved in various offences, including a case for attacking an excise official, it is submitted. BA.4060/08 2 Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that the recovery has already been effected on getting custody of the petitioners through the court by the police. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is at the initial stage and it is too early to consider this bail application. De facto complainant is injured and the submissions to the contrary are not correct. Deadly weapons were used in the offence and release of the petitioners at this stage may adversely affect the investigation. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that it is not fit to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.