IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2010 / 5TH BHADRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 4976 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ CMP.NO.2333/2010 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1ST CLASS COURT II, PEERMADE. (CRIME NO.418/2010 OF KUMILY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT) .... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- 1. RETHEESH, S/O.SASIDHARAN, ALUMKAL HOUSE, ANAVILASAM KARA, ANAVILASAM VILLAGE. 2. ANEESH, S/O.MOHANAN, CHURULICKAL HOUSE, ANAVILASAM KARA, ANAVILASAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): STATE: ----------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUMILY THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 4976 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of August, 2010 ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking bail. 2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.418 of 2010 of Kumily Police Station for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 308 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that on 25.7.2010 at about 4.30 p.m. the second accused attempted to attack the cousin of the defacto complainant. Seeing this, the defacto complainant tried to prevent them from doing so. Further attacks were alleged to have been made by the petitioners on the victim. Petitioners were arrested on 2.8.2010 and since then they have been in custody. Bail application moved before JFCM-II, Peermade was dismissed by the said court. Petitioners claimed that B.A.4976/2010. 2 they are totally innocent and they have been falsely implicated. It is also pointed out that their continued custody is not necessary. They therefore seek bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the petition. It is pointed out that the investigation is not yet complete. 4. The petitioners are in custody from 2.8.2010. Considering the nature of the crime and the role of the petitioners in the incident, it is felt that their continued custody is unnecessary. Major part of the investigation must have been over. Therefore, this application is allowed as follows: 1) Petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of JFCM-II, Peermade. 2) Petitioners shall report before the investigating B.A.4976/2010. 3 officer on every Thursday between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. till final report is laid. 3) Petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.