Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Petitioners are A3 and A4 in Crime No.771/2013 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case in short is that these petitioners and the other accused hatched a criminal conspiracy in pursuance of which, the murder of one Madhu was committed on 01.06.2013 in retaliation to an earlier murder. It is alleged that accused Nos.1 & 2 have arranged accused Nos. 3 to 7 to execute the murder and consequent to that, the death of Madu was caused. It has come out that after the above two murders, a further murder has also been taken place in retaliation to the murder of the said Madhu. The unfortunate victim in the 3rd murder is none other than the direct brother of the first accused.
3. This Court had occasion to consider a series of bail applications filed by these very same petitioners earlier and those applications were dismissed by finding that the petitioners have to undergo detention till the disposal of the Sessions Case.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners have pointed out that there is a change of circumstance at present as the trial has been scheduled before the court below for the period from 05/02/2015 onwards only, and therefore, they will have to undergo detention unnecessary till 05/02/2015. The same cannot be considered as a change of circumstance at all. Even during committal, the applications seeking bail were dismissed by this Court by directing the Committal Court to commit the matter expeditiously. After committal, the present case has been scheduled finally for trial. This Court does not consider the same as a change of circumstance at all. The bail applications were dismissed by this Court and finally the matter was dismissed by the Apex Court also.
6. Considering all the above and the seriousness of the allegations against the petitioners, I am of the view that they are not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the result, this Bail Application is dismissed.
ul/-
Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE [True copy] P.S. to Judge