IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH MAY 2011 / 20TH VAISAKHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 2969 of 2011() ------------------------------------------ CRIME NO.2614/2010 CENTRAL POLICE STATION IN ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ......... PETITIONER (S): IST ACCUSED --------------------------------------------- SHYJU.P.V, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 30 YEARS, PARAKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKADU P.O,, ERNAKULAM-682 504. BY ADV. SRI.P.T.JOSE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------- S I OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LATHA THANKAPPAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The Bail Application is permitted to be withdrawn as prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. 10/05/2011 SD/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------- BA No.2969 of 2011 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of May 2011 Order This is a petition filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking bail. 2. The petitioner is first accused in Crime No.2614/10 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, for the offence punishable under Sec.324 and 307 IPC r/w 34 IPC. The allegation against the accused is that out of enmity, they wanted to do away with the de facto complainant and with the said object, they assembled at the footpath situated in front of a multi storeyed building with iron rods and other deadly weapons. They attacked de facto complainant and caused very serious injuries on his head and body. The accused was arrested on 07.01.2011. The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the materials collected in support of the allegations and the reasonable apprehension of the accused tampering with the witnesses and the apprehension of threat to the complainant are matters to be gone into while considering the application for bail. The materials available on record would prima facie show that there is merit in the complaint -2- lodged by the complainant. 3. The prosecution contends that there is possibility that the accused may commit similar offences, if granted bail and that he would tamper with evidence or witnesses and threaten or terrorise the witnesses and would indulge in similar such activities which would hamper smooth investigation. The contention raised by the prosecution is that there is likelihood of the accused fleeing to another country or making himself scarce by going underground or becoming unavailable to the investigating agency also cannot be ignored. Considering all these aspects, I am not inclined to grant bail to the accused at this stage. The application is accordingly dismissed. N.K.Balakrishnan, Judge sta