High Court Kerala High Court

Ajeesh vs State Of Kerala on 1 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ajeesh vs State Of Kerala on 1 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4987 of 2008()



1. AJEESH
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SUDHEER

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :01/09/2008

 O R D E R
                               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.