IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3241 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRLMP.1112/2008 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM CRIME NO.463/07 OF SAKTHIKULANGARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/8TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- NITHIN @ SUNIL, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O FLORANCE, ACHANTHURUTHU, MUKKADU. BY ADV. SRI.ALAN PAPALI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA,(CRIME NO.463/2007 OF SAKTHIKULANGARA POLICE STATION), 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 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.NO. 3241 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Heard. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 324, 326 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is the 8th accused in the crime. According to prosecution, on 24.12.2007 at about 12.30 PM, petitioner along with other accused formed an unlawful assembly. The common object was to commit murder of deceased Sudheesh and the accused assaulted him using iron rods. He succumbed to the injuries on the fourth day. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that as per the first information statement, only five persons were involved. Their names are also stated in the first information statement and there is no whisper of any involvement of any other person. First information statement was given by an eye witness to the occurrence who could see the details of the incident. But, the petitioner was implicated after 20 days of the incident and after the BA.3241/08 2 death of the victim. According learned counsel for petitioner, his name is dragged at subsequent stage and he is not involved in the offence at all. He is prepared to co-operate with the investigation and surrender before the police, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are other witnesses who have implicated the petitioner. Hence the petition is opposed. He has submitted that the petitioner has allegedly beaten the deceased with hands and certain witnesses have given statement to that effect to the investigating officer. 5. Admittedly, no recovery is to be effected through the petitioner. He has not used any weapon against the victim, if at all the entire prosecution case is accepted. In the above circumstances, I find that a direction can be given to the petitioner to surrender before the investigating officer for interrogation and arrest and the following order is passed: The petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer between 10 AM to 5 PM on 2.6.2008 and in the event of his arrest, he shall be produced before the Magistrate's Court and he released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court below BA.3241/08 3 on condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the investigation and report before the investigating officer on every alternative day until further orders. He shall not do any act to tamper with evidence or to influence or threaten witnesses and if any complaint is received against him from any witnesses, his bail is liable to be cancelled. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.