IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1626 of 2010() ----------------------------- CMP.790/2010 of J.M.F.C.,ADIMALI CRIME NO .59/2010 OF ADIMALY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- SURENDRAN, S/O.DAMODARAN, PULLETTIL VEEDU, MULLARIKKUDI KARA, KONNATHADI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADIMALY. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.1626 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.59/2010 of Adimaly Police Station, Idukki. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The de facto complainant is the brother-in-law of the accused. The marriage of the accused and the sister of the de facto complainant took place about 20 years back. There are three children in that wedlock. About 4 months before the date of incident, the de facto complainant had brought the accused and his wife to the house of the de facto complainant, to avoid the disputes between the accused and his wife. The accused is an alcoholic. On 20/1/2010 at 9.15 P.M., while the de facto complainant came to his house in a car, the door was opened by the accused and he stabbed the de facto complainant on the various parts of his body. Immediately, the de facto complainant was taken to the hospital B.A. No.1626 /2010 2 at Adimaly. He was referred to Amritha Hospital, Ernakulam. He had to undergo a surgery. 4. The petitioner was arrested on 28/2/2010 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that after completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the case. However, he opposed the Bail Application and submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there will be threat to the life of the de facto complainant and the wife of the accused. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to comply with any condition that may be imposed by the Court for granting bail to him. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions. 8. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like B.A. No.1626 /2010 3 amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adimaly subject to the following conditions:- A) The petitioner shall report before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kattappana between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on every Monday and Thursday, until further orders; B) The petitioner shall not enter into the limits of Adimaly Police Station until further orders; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed as above. The Registry will forward a copy of this order to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kattappana. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm