High Court Kerala High Court

Illias vs State Of Kerala on 13 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Illias vs State Of Kerala on 13 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 3787 of 2008()


1. ILLIAS, AGED 20, S/O. SULAIMAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SHEMEER, AGED 22, S/O. SULAIMAN,
3. KAMARUDHEEN @ KAMRU, AGED 23,
4. RASHEED, AGED 39, S/O. ABBAS,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RAJIT

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :13/06/2008

 O R D E R
                                   K. HEMA, J.
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                             B.A.No. 3787 of 2008
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  Dated this the 13th day of June, 2008

                                      O R D E R

Application for bail.

2. The alleged offences are under sections 120(b), 109, 307 read

with section 34 IPC. According to the prosecution, while the defacto-

complainant was proceeding on a motor cycle, two persons came in

another motor cycle and attacked the defacto-complainant with sword

etc., with intention to kill him. The offence was committed in

pursuance of a criminal conspiracy with accused 3 and 4. Persons who

assaulted the defacto-complainant are accused 1 and 2. Accused 3 and

4 are brought in on the allegation of criminal conspiracy.

3. This application is strongly opposed. It is submitted by the

learned Public Prosecutor that accused 1 and 2 are involved in other

cases. It is also submitted that the incident is in connection with illegal

sand mining, in which accused 3 and 4 are involved. They are the

master brain behind the incident.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

BA 3787/08 -2-

marriage of the 3rd petitioner and his sister was fixed to 22-6-2008 and

he was busy in connection with the marriage. The 3rd petitioner is

innocent of the allegations made. The learned counsel for the petitioner

requests that at least the 3rd petitioner may be granted bail.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he has no

objection in granting bail to the 3rd petitioner on stringent conditions.

6. Hence, the following order is passed:-

1) Request for bail by petitioners 1 and 2 is rejected.

2) The 3rd petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a

bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount

to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned on the following

conditions:-

i) The 3rd petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer

on every Monday and Thursday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m., until

further orders.

ii) The 3rd petitioner shall not leave the limits of the police

station, within which the incident occurred except with the previous

permission of the Magistrate concerned.

BA 3787/08 -3-

iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate any witness or get

involved in any offence of similar nature and if this condition is

violated, bail is liable to be cancelled.

The application is partly allowed.

K. HEMA,
JUDGE.

mn.