IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1450 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME 65/06 OF PUTHENVELIKKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- JIJI, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.THANKARAJAN THERIVILA HOUSE, VILADH NAGAR NEAR KIZHAKKALAYIL DEVI TEMPLE 8TH KALLU, KOOVAPPADY PANCHAYATH THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CIRCLE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE PUTHENVELIKKARA POLICE STAION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY PUBLCI PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 1450 OF 2008 A ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for regular bail. Petitioner is the 3rd accused. Altogether there are five accused persons. On account of the animosity which the 1st accused entertained towards the de facto complainant, he allegedly engaged accused Nos.3 to 5, all allegedly goondas, to unleash an attack on the de facto complainant. They allegedly travelled in a car driven by the 2nd accused and mounted a brutal attack on the victim/de facto complainant. The incident took place on 2.5.06. Very serious injuries - 13 inside injuries and 4 fractures, were inflicted on the de facto complainant. A local person, seeing the merciless attack, intervened and questioned the attack of the accused and the accused persons allegedly attacked such person and caused serious injuries to him also. The petitioner was arrested in some BA.1450/08 : 2 : other crime. He has questionable criminal antecedents. After his arrest in the other crime in which allegations are raised under section 302 IPC, the formal arrest of the petitioner in this case was recorded on 18.1.08. The petitioner continues in custody from that date. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the petitioner, who has remained in custody in this crime from 18.1.08, may now be enlarged on bail. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the application. He submits that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. The nature of the attack, the nature of the injuries suffered, the nature of the antecedents of the petitioner must all weigh with this Court to persuade it to reject the application for regular bail filed by the petitioner at this stage, submits the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am BA.1450/08 : 3 : satisfied that this is not a fit case where this Court must invoke discretion under section 439 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. Investigators in a serious crime like this are certainly entitled to further time to complete the investigation, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. However, I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court for bail again at later stages of the investigation not, at any rate, prior to 24.3.2008. The investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks