IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6085 of 2009() -------------------------------------- CRMP.2607/2009 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM CMP.4953/2009 of J.M.F.C.-II, KOLLAM (CMP. 4952 /2009) CRIME NO. 605/2009 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/A5: ----------------------- AKHIL, AGED 20, (A3), S/O.MURALEEDHARAN, AKHILAGIRI, PARAYATHKONA, MAMON DESOM, KIZHUVALLAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR SRI.P.M.SANEER RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6085 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.605/2009 of Kottiyam Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120-B, 109, 379 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case is the following: Jose Sahayam was murdered on 25.07.2009 at 9.45 P.M. Accused No.4 had civil disputes with the deceased. It is also alleged that the deceased had spread some scandals against the fourth accused. The fifth accused was in love with one Greeshma. The fifth accused later married Greeshma secretly. It is alleged that Jose Sahayam, the deceased, informed the relatives of Greeshma about the marriage. Thus accused Nos. 4 and 5 had enmity towards Jose Sahayam. They conspired together and decided to do away with Jose Sahayam. They sought the help of accused Nos.6 B.A. No. 6085 of 2009 2 and 7 who are professional goondas. It is alleged that accused Nos.6 and 7 sought the assistance of accused Nos.1 to 3 and they together committed the crime. The petitioner was arrested on 06.08.2009 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that accused No.3 is an Autorickshaw driver. He is not involved in any other criminal case. There are no materials to connect the petitioner with the offence alleged. 5. On going through the records, I am not inclined to accept the contentions of the petitioner that there are no materials to connect him with the offence. Prima facie, I am satisfied that the investigating agency was justified in arraying the petitioner as an accused. Overt acts are also alleged against the third accused. 6. It is submitted that the investigation is in progress. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 10 are yet to be arrested. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would have an adverse impact on the smooth investigation of the case. B.A. No. 6085 of 2009 3 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be released on bail at this stage. The investigation is not complete. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation. For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln