High Court Kerala High Court

Ibrahim vs State Of Kerala on 18 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ibrahim vs State Of Kerala on 18 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4959 of 2008()


1. IBRAHIM, AGED 25 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :18/08/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                          ------------------
                      B.A. No. 4959 OF 2008
                    ------------------------------
             Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008


                             O R D E R

This petition is for bail.

2. The alleged offence is under Sections 143, 147, 307,

316 & 120B read with Section149 of I.P.C. According to the

prosecution, on 3/03/2008 the accused trespassed into the

courtyard of the house of the defacto complainant. Accused Nos.1

to 3 poured acid on the body of the defacto complainant, his

pregnant wife and servant with an intention to kill them. The

death of quick unborn child in the womb was caused because of

the injury sustained and the three sustained serious injuries.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner has no role in the crime and he has been unnecessarily

implicated as an accused No.8 in the crime. No specific

allegations are made against him. He has surrendered before the

court on 23/07/2008 and he is in custody since then.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the

investigation is in the preliminary stage and granting of bail to

B.A. No. 4959 OF 2008
2

the petitioner at this stage will adversely affect the investigation,

on the facts and nature of the allegations made in this case. It

was submitted that the offence was committed against the

injured at the instance of the first wife of the defacto

complainant. It is the relative of the first wife, who are involved

in the crime. There was conspiracy and the petitioner is the

person who arranged the money for the commission of the

offence. He was also present in the spot at the time of occurrence

in the terms of Sessions Court by A1 and A3. The nature of

offence of the petitioner and various others are involved into,

hence this petition is opposed.

On hearing both sides and in the nature of allegations

made, I am satisfied that the release of the petitioner on bail at

this stage will adversely affect the investigation and hence this

petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE

scm