T.M. Hassan Pillai, J.

The grievance of the petitioner is against the order of cancellation of bail granted to him by the learned Judicial I Class Magistrate, Sulthan Bathery in Crime No. 253 of 1999 of Pulpally Police Station. Bail was granted to him on the ground that the allegation made by the prosecution against him is that he committed an offence punishable under S.324IPC. On the basis of the statement of the injured (one John Joseph, S/o. Joseph), recorded by the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Pulpally Police Station, a case has been registered in Crime No. 263 of 1999 of that Police Station under S.324 IPC.

2. The earliest version of the incident given by the injured (shorn of unnecessary details) is to be stated here. Petitioner's father came to the tea shop conducted by one Sarasamma in the rented building let out to her by him (petitioner's father) and he (father of petitioner) was in a, fully drunken state. He asked one Krishnankutty, who was taking food ('Kanji') at that time from the tea shop of Sarasamma, why he was quarrelling and also threatened him that he would be beaten. Thereafter he told the injured that his father had grabbed the property belonging to him (petitioner's father) and that he (father of the injured) was not able to enjoy that property. When the injured objected abusing of his deceased father, petitioner's father scolded him also in filthy language. On hearing his father abusing the injured/first informant, petitioner's brother Shaiju came there. The injured came out of the tea shop to the road in front of that tea shop. Hurling abuses at him, petitioner stabbed him with a dagger knife. He also stabbed one Shiju, who is the friend of the first informant, who tried to separate the petitioner and the first informant. The alleged incident took place on 10.11.1999 at about 7.30 pm.

3. The ground for cancellation of the bail stated in the impugned order is that the statement of one Dr. Ibrahim who treated the injured recorded under S.161 Cr.P.C. disclosed that one of the injured sustained.

"... a deep injury 3 x 2 cm. on the lower and of vertable column penetrating in the abdominal cavity."

The learned Magistrate has further stated in the order impugned that the doctor has also stated that the injury on Shiju was on the chest 2x1 cm., which was deep entering into the thoracic and abdominal cavity and that the injuries are grievous in nature. The learned Magistrate proceeded on the basis that the accused had inflicted injury on Shiju on vital part of his body and that the de facto complainant had mentioned in the first information statement that the injury was very serious in nature. According to the Magistrate, an offence under S.307 IPC is revealed to have committed by the accused and material facts were suppressed by the investigating agency in the remand report. In short, the ground relied on for cancellation of the bail by the learned Magistrate is the availability of materials before the Court prima facie to come to a conclusion regarding the alleged commission of an offence under S.307 IPC and the suppression of material facts by the investigating officer in the remand report filed by him.

4. After cancelling the bail, the learned Magistrate directed to issue a non-bailable warrant to arrest and cause production of the accused before Court at the earliest.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri. Mathai argued vehemently before me that the materials available on record do not justify the conclusion reached by the learned Magistrate while cancelling bail already granted to the petitioner that a prima facie case of commission of an offence under S.307 is made out.

6. It is not proper on my part at this stage to express any view whether the materials so far collected by the investigating agency prima facie disclosed a case of commission of an offence punishable under S.307IPC and I need only to consider the question whether the learned Magistrate is justified in cancelling the bail of