SHIBU @ C.P. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are accused 1 to 7 in Crime No.559/2014 of Fort Police Station, which is registered for offence punishable u/s.143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307 r/w 149 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution allegation is that on 23.3.2012 at 11 p.m. the accused 1 to 9 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the defacto complainant and others with arms like soda bottles and sword due to the political enmity, as a result, the defacto complainant and others sustained serious injury. Immediately, they were removed to Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. On the basis of information, Fort Police registered the above crime and investigation is going on. They were arrested on 26.3.2014 and remanded to judicial custody. Their bail application was dismissed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -II, Thiruvananthapuram. Moreover, their earlier bail application namely B.A. No.2544/2014 filed before this Court was also dismissed. Hence, they again approached this Court with this second application.

(2.) HEARD both sides. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the marriage of the 1st petitioner's sister is scheduled to be conducted on 27.4.2014. His father is no more. In such a situation, his presence in the house is very essential. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners are not habitual offenders and this incident was occurred due to the political enmity. They are ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court.

(3.) ON the basis of rival argument advanced by both counsel, I have perused the case diary and wound certificate issued by the Doctor, who treated the injured. Incised wound 6cm x 4cm on the left shoulder is a serious injury. Moreover, the 5th accused assaulted with bottle which caused hematoma on the left side of the forehead. The offences alleged against the petitioners are u/s.307 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act. The investigation is practically progressing. Report submitted by the Investigating Officer discloses that the petitioners were involved in another crime also. Witnesses were questioned. Weapons used for assaulting the victim was practically recovered. Major portion of the investigation is covered. In such a situation, I am of the view that further detention in custody is not necessary.