IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 4979 of 2011() ------------------------ CMP.2239/2011 of J.M.F.C., HARIPAD .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1-3 ----------------------- 1. SUKU @ SANGEETH. S/O. SATHEESAN, KOCHUVEETTIL, PERUMBALAY MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE ALAPPUZHA. 2. SUNIL S/O. SUDARSNAN, KOCHUVEETTIL, PERUMBALY MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. 3. JAIJU, S/O. KUNJUMON, PUTHENMANNEL VEETIL, RAMANCHERI MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. SRI.ARUN CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DIST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. .................................................... Bail Application No. 4979 of 2011 ..................................................... Dated: 29-06-2011 ORDER Petitioners, who are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No. 187 of 2011 of Thrikkunnapuzha Police Station, Alppuzha District for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 427 and 307 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. and Sec. 27 (1) of the Arms Act, seeks his enlargement on bail. The occurrence took place on 14- 05-2011. The petitioner was arrested on 30-05-2011. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the left palm of the victim was amputated and A1 who was wielding the sword-stick had inflicted the above injury. 3. Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the relative conduct B.A. No. 4979 of 2011 -:2:- of the parties, the extent of the injury sustained, the propensities of the petitioner, 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 petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioner making himself scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 29th day of June, 2011. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE)