IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5796 of 2009 CRIME NO.497 OF 2009 OF KATTAPPANA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: ACCUSED: -------------------- 1. LALU, S/O.JACOB PALACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THOVARAYAR KARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE-IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. DEEPU, S/O.GOPINATHAN UNACKAPARAYIL HOUSE, NARIYANPARA KARA KATTAPPANA VILLAGE-IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVASIA RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS: --------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KATTAPPANA POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 5796 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.497 of 2009 of Kattappana Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 450, 376(g) and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 25.8.2009, the accused persons who were engaged in cutting trees in the neighbouring compound, forcibly entered into the house of the de facto complainant and committed the offence. The de facto complainant is a house wife. She was discharged from the hospital a few days before the date of incident. Her husband had gone for work after taking meals. At that time, the accused persons entered into the house and committed the offence. The victim was also beaten up. B.A. NO. 5796 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 4. The petitioners were arrested on 26.8.2009 and they are in judicial custody. 5. The petitioners filed B.A.No.5334 of 2009 under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That Bail Application was dismissed by me by the order dated 23.9.2009. This Bail Application is filed on 1.10.2009, after a lapse of seven days. I do not think that the petitioners are justified in moving this Bail Application within a short time after the dismissal of the earlier Bail Application. The investigation is in progress. I do not think that the petitioners can be released on bail at this stage. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed with liberty to move for bail afresh after a period of two weeks. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/