IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 7493 of 2008()
1. THOMAS MAMMEN @ JOMON, S/O.MAMMEN JOHN,
... Petitioner
2. SURESH @ MANOJ, S/O SUKUMARAN, SURESH
3. UDAYAN S/O THAMPI, ANCHALASSERIL VEEDU,
4. SREEKUMAR @ RAMESAN, S/O RAJAPPAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY S.I.OF
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.S.MANU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :19/12/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B.A. No. 7493 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of December,2008
O R D E R
Petition for bail.
2. The alleged offences are under sections 294(b), 452,
323, 324, 308 read with section 34 IPC. According to
prosecution, one Kuttappan was on enmical terms with de facto
complainant who is an advocate by profession, since he had made
a complaint against him in respect of illegal sand mining.
Infuriated by this he engaged a goonda gang on hire to assault
de facto complainant and the latter was assaulted by accused
nos. 1, 2 and 5 by using weapons like iron bar, axe and sword
stick . The six accused was sitting in the car.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the
incident occurred on 20-10-2008 and petitioners 1 and 2 were
remanded to custody on 26-10-2008. Petitioners 3 and 4 on 22-
10-2008. It is pointed out that there are several discrepancies in
the F.I.R. and remand report. As per the First Information
Statement, only three persons are involved in the offence but
BA 7493 /08 -2-
now, several other accused are brought in the array of accused.
It is also submitted that only two weapons were allegedly used
for the offence as per First Information Statement, but another
weapon is now included. Therefore, bail may be granted, it is
submitted.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for
de facto complainant were heard. Learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that petitioners are accused 2, 3, 5 and 6 and they are
hired gundas. They were engaged by the 6th accused who is a
close relative of Kuttappan and petitioners were engaged for
assaulting de facto complainant on hire. However, he has no
objection in granting bail.
5. Learned counsel for de facto complainant opposed this
petition and submitted that de facto complainant is an advocate
by profession and he is even now in the hospital, after having
sustained injuries on 20-10-2008. For the sole reason that a
complaint was lodged against one Kuttappan relating to his
illegal activities, he was brutally assaulted by petitioners who are
hired gundas. In case petitioners are released on bail, it is likely
that de facto complainant may be intimidated and offence will be
repeated, it is submitted.
BA 7493 /08 -3-
6. On hearing both sides, I find that at this stage of
investigation, it may not be proper to grant bail.
This petition is dismissed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE.
mn.