IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2011 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 3734 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.2204 OF 2011 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN (NORTH) POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------ RASHEED, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. KASIM, RESIDING AT PUTHIYEDATHU VEEDU, CHENDAKUNI DESOM, MEENANGADI PANCHAYATH, PURAKKADY VILLAGE, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.V.JAMES SRI.P.DALBI EMMANUEL SRI.M.J.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR, ERNAKULAM TOWN (NORTH) POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.2204/2010. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- B.A.No. 3734 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of May, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 2204 pf 2010 of Ernakulam Town (North) Police Station. It was registered under Sections 449, 347, 302, 397 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. This application is for regular bail. 2. The learned Sessions Judge in his order has narrated the details of the offences and the gruesome nature of the act. The learned Sessions Judge has noted as follows: “It is alleged that he has decided to raise funds by committing robbery. He was watching all the houses situated at the side of the road from the Ernaulam North Railway Station to Pachalam, and he located the house of deceased Bindu. Deceased Bindu and her husband used to let out the rooms at the upper storey of their house. He was carefully watching the said house and could realise that deceased Bindu and her two small children alone would be present at the house during day time and none of the tenants would be available during day time. He purchased a chopper from Western Hardwares, Ernakulam North, on 12.11.2010. On 16.11.2010 at 9.30 am, he came to the BA.3753/11 - 2 - house of the deceased and then the husband of the deceased namely Ramakrishnan was present. When the petitioner requested for a room on rent, the said Ramakrishnan asked the petitioner to come in the evening. At about 3.30 pm the petitioner came near the house and waited there till the said Ramakrishnan left the house by the motor bike. By making sure that the deceased and her two small children were the only persons present at the house, the accused with the chopper packed in paper, trespassed into the house of othe deceased with a view to committing murder and robbery. Deceased Bindu took the petitioner to room No.101 situated at the 2nd floor for showing the room. She opened the room and showed the room to the petitioner. The petitioner immediately closed the door of the room from inside and dragged and placed a cot adjacent to the door. After confining the deceased in the room, it is alleged that the petitioner indiscriminately inflicted 37 cut njuries on the head, face and body of the deceased, thereby causing the death of the deceased by about 3.45 pm. When cuts were being inflicted, the deceased offered resistance. Thereafter, he snatched away the gold chain with locket weighting 26.500 grams from the neck of the deceased and also took away her two gold bangles weighing 15.400 grams. Thereafter, he washed the chopper at the toilet situated at the southern side of the room. On hearing the cry of the deceased, the neighbours came to the spot and then BA.3753/11 - 3 - they could see the petitioner running away from the house. On getting information that the petitioner had gone to Lourd hospital for treatment as he had sustained an injury on his face, as he had fell down during the scuffle with the deceased and his face hit on the cot, the Police reached there, questioned the petitioner, seized the gold ornaments robbed by him, from the inner pocket of his pants.” 3. In the facts and circumstances pointed out above, I find no reason to grant bail to the accused. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the chemical analysis report/TST has not been received, the case could not be committed so far. Therefore, necessary directions will be issued by the Sessions Judge to the learned Magistrate to see that the case is committed at the earliest for an expeditious disposal of the case. With the above observation, this bail application is dismissed. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE vgs