High Court Kerala High Court

M.M.Ayoob vs State Represented By C.I. Of … on 2 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
M.M.Ayoob vs State Represented By C.I. Of … on 2 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 3955 of 2007()


1. M.M.AYOOB,S/O.M.M.MOYDUNNI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE REPRESENTED BY C.I. OF POLICE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.NIRMAL KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :02/07/2007

 O R D E R
                                 R. BASANT, J.

                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                          B.A.No.  3955   of   2007

                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                   Dated this the 2nd  day of   July, 2007


                                     O R D E R

Application for regular bail. Petitioner is the first accused.

He allegedly went to the house of the deceased with culpable

intention to attack the brother of the deceased. The deceased

intervened and tried to save his brother. At that time the petitioner

planted the stab on the deceased. He succumbed to the injuries. The

alleged incident took place on 6.5.2007. He continues in custody

from 7.5.2007. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner is

an employee of the second accused and there were bitter disputes,

differences and acrimony between the second accused and the

brother of the deceased. The petitioner, along with the second

accused, had gone to the house of the defacto complainant allegedly

with questionable and culpable motives. The second accused was

arrested and released on bail as per Annex.A3 order dt 28.5.2007 by

the learned Sessions Judge.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

investigation has made much progress. The petitioner has remained

B.A.No. 3955 of 2007

2

in custody from 7.5.2007. The alleged co-conspirator and the one, at whose

instance the petitioner allegedly committed the crime, has already been

enlarged on bail. In these circumstances it is prayed that the petitioner may

also be enlarged on bail.

3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that

the defacto complainant and his relatives are facing threat from the accused.

He has already come to this Court with an application for affording police

protection for him. In these circumstances the petitioner may not be

enlarged on bail at this early stage of investigation. Grant of bail to the

second accused may not be reckoned as a circumstance justifying grant of

regular bail to the petitioner. The nature of involvement of the two

accused are entirely different. At any rate, the Investigators may be granted

some further time to complete the investigation, submits the Prosecutor.

4. I do not want to express any opinion on the correctness of the

grant of regular bail to the second accused by the Sessions Judge as per

Annex.A3. Suffice it to say, I am satisfied that the petitioner, who is

alleged to have indulged in the overt acts which led to the death of the

deceased, can or ought to be released on bail at this stage. In a serious

B.A.No. 3955 of 2007

3

crime like this, the Investigators are entitled for reasonable further time to

complete the investigation.

5. This application is, in these circumstance, dismissed. But I may

hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move the learned

Sessions Judge or this court for bail again at a later stage of the

investigation, not at any rate, prior to 16.7.2007. The Investigators shall, in

the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation.

(R. BASANT)

Judge

tm