IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4987 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.93/2008 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ----------------- AJEESH S/O. RAJAPPAN, ASWATHY, T.C.5/2070, VRINDAVAN GARDEN, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT:COMPLAINANT:- ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4987 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of September,2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 109, 323, 307 and 120(b) IPC. According to the prosecution, accused 1 to 5 came in a motor bike and attempted to commit murder of defacto-complainant. The 6th accused provided weapons to them. Accused 7 to 9 were implicated in the offence as persons who conspired to commit the offence with others. According to prosecution, the offence was committed as a retaliation to an attack made on the 9th accused whose hand was chopped off in an incident occurred in 2005. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 6th accused who has more serious role in the offence was granted an order in his favour as per order dated 11-5-2008 in B.A. no.2973/2008 by this Court. Petitioner is the 9th accused, and he is implicated at a highly belated stage, in an offence of conspiracy, with an ulterior motive, it is submitted. Therefore, petitioner may be granted at least the same benefit, as extended to 6th accused by this Court. BA 4987/08 2 4. The application is opposed. On going through the order passed in favour of the 6th accused, I find that having granted such an order, I do not find any reason why similar order cannot be passed in the case of petitioner also. 5. Hence, the following order is passed:- (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and make himself available for interrogation. (2) Thereafter, in the event of his arrest, if any, he shall be produced before the Magistrate court on the same day by the police. (3) On production of the petitioner before the learned Magistrate, and if any bail application is filed, the said application shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate on merit, as expeditiously as possible. This application is disposed of accordingly. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.