High Court Kerala High Court

Ussainar vs The State on 19 March, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ussainar vs The State on 19 March, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 1742 of 2008()


1. USSAINAR, AGED 40 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :19/03/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     B.A.No. 1742 of 2008
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008

                               O R D E R

Application for regular bail. The petitioner is the 4th

accused. Altogether there are four accused persons. They face

allegations in a crime registered, inter alia, under Sections 120B

and 302 I.P.C. Initially it was a crime registered under the

caption ‘man missing’. The deceased was found missing. Crime

was registered. In the course of the investigation it was revealed

that the dead body of the deceased with injuries suffered by its

was abandoned in a rubber plantation within the jurisdiction of

another police station. The section of offence was altered.

Investigation continued under Section 302 I.P.C. In the course of

investigation it was revealed that all the four accused had

conspired to do away with the deceased on account of prior

animosity and disputes between them. He was attracted to the

house of the 4th accused, where all the four accused were present.

They caused his death by inflicting injuries. Thereafter the body

B.A.No. 1742 of 2008
2

was removed and abandoned. The petitioner was arrested on

26.1.2008. Accused 1 and 2 were arrested on 1.2.2008. The third

accused has also been arrested by now. Investigation is not complete.

Final report has not been filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent. At any rate, the petitioner, who has remained in

custody from 26.1.2008, may now be enlarged on bail, subject to

appropriate conditions, prays the learned counsel.

3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. Allegations

are serious. Investigation is not complete. Considering the totality of

circumstances, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail at this stage,

submits the Prosecutor.

4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I am satisfied that

the petitioner is not entitled for regular bail at this stage. In coming to

this conclusion I have taken note of the nature and gravity of the

allegations raised, the quantum and quality of materials collected as

also the stage of investigation in this case.

B.A.No. 1742 of 2008
3

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

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

court for bail again at a later stage of the investigation, not at any

rate, prior to 2.4.2008. The Investigators shall, in the meantime, make

every endeavour to complete the investigation.

(R. BASANT)
Judge

tm