BAIL APPL No. 601 of 2008 · Kerala High Court

B.A. No.601 OF 2008 -: 2 :-directed at him. He was interrogated. It was realised that he had an unexplained and sutured injury on his person. He was subjected to close interrogation. He was arrested. He allegedly confessed to the crime. The unexplained injury in the mouth under the tongue was suffered at the hands of the deceased who tried to save herself. The petitioner had no explanation for the injury. The weapon – a heavy stone used for the infliction of the injury as also the purse which the deceased was carrying at the relevant time were traced on the basis of confession statement of the petitioner. There are other circumstances including the identification by a person who saw the petitioner leaving in ahurry from the scene of the crime. This is also relied on by the Investigator. The petitioner was arrested on 11/12/07.Investigation is in progress. He continues in custody from the date of his arrest.3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. The police is trying to make vexatious and false allegations against the petitioner in an attempt to claim credit for resolving the crime. The petitioner, B.A. No.601 OF 2008 -: 3 :-who has remained in custody from 11/12/07, may not be enlarged on bail, prays the learned counsel for the petitioner.4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the allegations are very serious and grave. Satisfactory indications have been collected pointing to the complicity of the petitioner. At this early stage of the investigation, the petitioner may not be granted bail. Release of the petitioner on bail would hamper the smooth course of the investigation. In a serious crime like this, the Investigator may be granted reasonable further time to complete the investigation, prays the learned Public Prosecutor.