IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4102 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.955/2009 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS : ACCUSED 1 TO 3 --------------------------------------------- 1. BIJU, S/O. AJAYAN, BIJU BHAVAN, MAILAM VILLAGE. 2. MUKESH, S/O. VISVANATHAN, BANGALATHARA VEEDU, MAILAM VILLAGE. 3. MAHESH, S/O. VISVANATHAN, BANGALATHARA VEEDU, MAILAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.ALAN PAPALI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, (CRIME NO.955 OF 2009- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION ) REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.4102 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009 ORDER This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.955 of 2009 of Kottarakkara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 16.6.2009, the accused persons wrongfully restrained Anil Kumar, son of the defacto complainant and caused hurt to him by fisting on his nose, beating him with an iron pipe and cutting over his right ear with a chopper. Anil Kumar sustained injuries including grievous injuries. The petitioners surrendered before court on 6.7.2009 and they were remanded to judicial custody. The application filed by the petitioners for bail was rejected by the learned Magistrate as per the order dated 14.7.2009. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that accused Nos.2 and 3 are the brothers of the BA No.4102/2009 2 defacto complainant's son-in-law. There was dispute between the defacto complainant's daughter and her husband and a case was pending before the Family Court. That case was settled and they are living together. It is submitted that the present case is an offshoot of the disputes between the defacto complainant's daughter and her husband. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioners, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioners. The petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Kottarakkara, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; BA No.4102/2009 3 d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) 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 csl