IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2011 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 4334 of 2011(V) ------------------------------ CMP.4485/2011 of MUN-MAGI COURT, PARAVOOR CRIME NO.611/2011 OF PARAVUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIOENRS: ACCUSED NO.3,4 AND 5 --------------------------------- 1. VINESH, AGED 30, S/O. VIJAYAN, KANALIL VEEDU, NADUVILAKKARA CHERRY, MAYYANADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.(A-3) 2. ANEESH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.YESODHARAN, KALLUVILA VEEDU, NEDUNGOLAM, PARAVUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT (A4) 3. LALU, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN, POIKAYIL THODIYIL VEEDU, NEDUNGOLAM CHERRY PARAVUR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT (A5) BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVUR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. -------------------------- Bail Appln.No.4334 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011 ORDER Petitioners, who are accused Nos.3, 4 & 5 in Crime No.611 of 2011 of Paravur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 326 & 308 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, seek their enlargement on bail. The occurrence took place on 08/05/2011. The petitioners were arrested on 10/05/2011. 2. The application was opposed on behalf of the prosecution. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners, the relative conduct of the parties, the extent of the injury sustained, the propensities of the petitioners, the sentiments of the near relatives of the victim and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the petitioners are released on bail, they will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioners making themselves scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. skj