IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5921 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 164/2008 OF ADHUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- KESHAVAN ACHARI, S/O.NERAPPU ACHARI, NATTUKALLU, BELUR VILLAGE, ADHUR, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ADHUR, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 5921 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of September,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. According to prosecution, on 20-8-2008 at 5.30 p.m. while defacto-complainant was travelling along with his friend in an autorickshaw, petitioner was found standing by the side of the road and the autorickshaw was stopped. Petitioner was asked why he had pull down shutter on the person of the daughter of defacto-complainant's elder brother. This offended petitioner and he assaulted defacto-complainant using a knife and also criminally intimidated him. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there is a case and counter case. Defacto-complainant along with others allegedly trespassed into the house of petitioner and assaulted petitioner's wife and a complaint was filed by her and a crime was registered under sections 448, 354 read with section 34 IPC. Defacto-complainant is the 4th accused in that crime. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that defacto-complainant was granted bail in the counter case. Taking into consideration all these facts anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that it is true that there are two crimes on the same BA 5921/08 -2- day, but those are not case and counter case. The incidents happened at different time and different places. The incident in this case happened on the road at about 5.30 p.m. and other incident happened at the house of petitioner, subsequently. Defacto-complainant sustained serious injuries including fracture and petitioner used a weapon also and recovery is not yet effected. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature of the allegations made, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. This is particularly so, since petitioner may be required for effecting the recovery of the weapon which was allegedly used for the offence. The incident happened as early as on 20-8-2008 and petitioner could not be arrested so far, and the investigation could not be proceeded with effectively, by recovering the weapon. 6. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days and co-operate with the investigation. With these direction this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.