IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2010 / 28TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3619 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- CRIME NO.309/2010 OF VALAPAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DIST. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MUBI @ MUBARAK, S/O.JABBAR, CHIRAPURAM HOUSE, KUTTAMUGHA, VATANAPPALLY, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.V. TEKCHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K. HEMA, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 3619 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of June, 2010 O R D E R This petition is bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 324, 326 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, there was a quarrel between first and second accused and the de facto complainant at a marriage reception because of previous enmity towards accused nos. 1 to 4. On the crucial day, all the accused in furtherance of their common intention to commit murder assaulted de facto complainant. First and second accused used sword and third and fourth accused used iron rod. First accused inflicted a cut on the head of the defacto complainant and second accused also aimed a cut on the head but when it was evaded, de facto complainant's three fingers were chopped off. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that third accused was granted bail by this court. Petitioner is the second accused and he was arrested on the same day, on 12.05.2010. B.A. No. 3619 of 2010 2 Petitioner is in custody for the past 37 days and he may be grant bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case of third accused stands on a different footing from that of petitioner. Considering the serious nature of the allegations and the stage of investigation, bail may not be granted to petitioner at this stage, it is submitted. 5. On going through the order of this court in bail application filed by second accused (order dated 28.05.2010 in B.A. No. 3112/2010), I am satisfied that the case of third accused stands totally different from that of petitioner. The court granted bail to third accused noting some discrepancy regarding his involvement in the F.I. Statement and Annexure-C in that case, regarding the name of accused. But considering the stage of investigation and nature of allegations made against petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to him at this stage. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln