IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 4089 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.112/2010 OF MUVATUPUZHA POLICE STATION .................... (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- ELDHOSE, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.KURIAKOSE, TRIKALATHOOR, MULAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TLAUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THOMAS SRI.NAVEEN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION (INVESTIGATING OFFICER INC RRIME NO.112/2010) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KRALA, ERNAKULAM COCHIN - 31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.4089 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 8th July, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, deceased had business transaction and money dealings with petitioner (second accused). Therefore, the deceased was called to the house of second accused on 17.1.2010 and all the three consumed liquor. Thereafter, the first and second accused, who are brothers, in furtherance of common intention, committed murder of the deceased, by cutting with chopper and inflicting serious injuries. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was arrested on 17.1.2010 and when he went to the Police Station to lodge the first information statement, he saw his brother having confined there. Petitioner was also implicated as the accused. He has not committed any overt act, even according to prosecution case, it is submitted. The shirt worn by petitioner did not contain any blood stain, as per the chemical analysis BA NO. 4089/10 2 report. It is also submitted that there are contradictions in the statements of the police officials in respect of the arrest. Though the prosecution would allege that the arrest was on 17.1.2010, two Police Constables gave statement to the effect that the accused surrendered on 18.1.2010. Petitioner is in custody for the past more than about five months. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in Annexure A1 order of the learned Sessions Judge, it is stated that the case can be scheduled for trial and disposed of at the earliest. The deceased sustained as many as 18 ante-mortem injuries, of which, most of the injuries were serious in nature. The final report is already filed and if petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the order of the learned Sessions Judge, particularly the observations in paragraph 4, I am not inclined to grant bail to petitioner at this stage. Petitioner may move the learned Sessions Judge for expeditious disposal of the case, and if there is still any delay, and the case cannot be disposed of within a reasonable time, BA NO. 4089/10 3 petitioner is at liberty to apply for bail to the learned Sessions Judge. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs