IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5825 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.354/2011 OF THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : ---------------------------- 1. RATHEESH C.V., S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 27 YEARS, PATTIMMAL, PUTHUPADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. RANJITH C.V., AGED 29 YEARS, (SAME ADDRESS). 3. VINU @ VINUMON, S/O.CHATHUKUTTY, AGED 24 YEARS, PUZHAMKUNNUMMAL, PUDUPADI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. SHYJAL P.K., S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 27 YEARS, PUZHAMKUNNUMMAL, PUDUPADI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.5825 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.354 of 2011 of Thamarassery Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 452, 354, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. It is seen that the husband of the de facto BA 5825/2011 2 complainant sustained fracture on 9th and 10th ribs. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the husband of the de facto complainant is not a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and therefore, the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act will not apply. Even assuming that it is so, the allegation is that he has sustained grievous hurt. There is allegation of the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act having been committed by the accused. Section 18 is a bar for entertaining an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even if the offences under the Indian Penal Code alone are taken into account, I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in favour of the petitioner, taking into account the nature and gravity of the offence. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl