Kerala High Court
Thaj @ Althaj vs State Of Kerala on 30 October, 2012
Author: P.Bhavadasan
Bench: P.Bhavadasan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/8TH KARTHIKA 1934
Bail Appl..No. 7649 of 2012 ()
------------------------------
CRIME NO.937/2012 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
--------------------------------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
--------------------------------------
THAJ @ ALTHAJ,S/O.NAZAR RAUTHAR,
AGED 20 YEARS,ALTHAF MANSILIL,
VARIKKOLILTHEKKETHIL HOUSE, CHERUVALLUR MURI,
CHERIYANADU VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADV. SRI.SABU THOZHUPPADAN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
-------------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION,
THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.RASHEED
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
B.A. No.7649 of 2012
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2012
O R D E R
The petitioner is the 10th accused in Crime No.937/2012 of Chengannur Police Station, Alappuzha District for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 143, 144, 147, 148, 342, 323, 324, 307, 302 r/w 149 of IPC.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with others formed into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object to cause injury and grievous hurt to the defacto complainant who belonged to ABVP, attacked him and caused serious injury resulting in the death of the victim. The petitioner would say that he is totally innocent and has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive apart from contending that he has been in custody from 20.8.2012 onwards and his continued custody is unnecessary. Therefore he seeks bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition pointing out that the investigation is not yet complete.
4. CD was made available for perusal. Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the role played by him, the fact that he has been in custody from 20.8.2012 onwards, a good part of investigation must have been completed by now, and also the fact that the investigating agency has not B.A.No.7649/2012 :2: expressed any apprehension that if released on bail the petitioner is likely to abscond, it is felt that the continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary. The petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:
(1) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the JFCM-I, Chengannur.
(2) The learned JFCM shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts produced by them before granting bail to the petitioner.
(3) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Friday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., till final report is filed.
(4) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses. (5) If any of the condition is violated by the petitioner, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the learned Magistrate concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law.
P.BHAVADASAN, Judge.
okb.