IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 476 of 2010(B) ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.1011/2009 OF THE VARKALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ........ PETITIONER (S)/ACCUSED --------------------------- VINU CHACO @ VINNER, S/O.ABRAHAM CHACO, AGED 28 YEARS, KURUDANPAARAYIL HOUSE, NEAR THALAYOLAPARAMBU JUNCTION, THALAYOLAPARAMBU DESOM, VADAYAR VILLAGE, VAIKKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, VARKALA POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 476 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1011 of 2009 of Varkala Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 341 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 11.12.2009, the deceased was murdered by the petitioner in the restaurant run by him. It is alleged that the deceased had come to the restaurant and there was some quarrel between the accused and the deceased. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the deceased left the place thereafter. But he was brought back to the restaurant by the accused and he was brutally assaulted by the accused. It is pointed out that there were 33 ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the scene of occurrence, according to the prosecution, is the B.A. No. 476 of 2010 2 restaurant run by the accused. The restaurant was opened only about one and a half months before the date of the incident. The deceased was also running another restaurant in the locality. The counsel submits that the deceased along with his henchmen came to the restaurant run by the petitioner and the petitioner was brutally assaulted by them. The petitioner sustained injuries and he had to defend himself to save his life. It is also submitted that the matter was reported to the police by the petitioner. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital and he was arrested by the police while he was in the hospital. 5. The petitioner had filed two Bail Applications on earlier occasions and those applications were dismissed. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 12.12.2009 and he is in judicial custody since then. The investigation has progressed much thereafter. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions. B.A. No. 476 of 2010 3 8. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Varkala subject to the following conditions:- A) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on every Monday, till the final report is filed or until further orders. B) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. C) The petitioner shall not enter into the limits of Varkala Police Station for a period of three months, except for complying with conditions A and B. D) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Varkala within a period of one week. If the petitioner does not hold an Indian Passport, an affidavit sworn to by him to that effect shall be filed before the learned Magistrate within one week. E) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. F) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. B.A. No. 476 of 2010 4 G) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed as above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln