IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3439 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.182 OF 2008 OF KURUVILANGADU POLICE STATION) PETITIONER: ----------------- ANEESH, KANICHATTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE (MAROTTICKATHADAM), KURIANAD KARA MONIPPALLY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.182 OF 2008 OF KURUVILANGADU POLICE STATION) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3439 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution on 9.5.2008, at about 5 p.m., the petitioner trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted her. He also abused her in filthy language and a complaint was lodged and a crime was registered under Sections 452, 294B, 323 & 354 IPC. 2. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail considering the nature of the offence committed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the crime is falsely foisted against the petitioner. There was an altercation between the petitioner and husband of the defacto complainant from a toddy shop and both of them fell down. The defacto complainant anticipated filing of a BA No.3439/08 2 complaint by the petitioner against her husband. This is the only reason to file a complaint. 4. On hearing both sides, I do not find any ground to accept the defence version at this stage, in the absence of any supporting materials. Considering the nature of the offence, I do not find it fit to grant anticipatory bail. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl