IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2010 / 16TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3277 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ (CRIME NO.153/2010 OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT) PETITIONERS: ----------------------- 1. RAJESH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, THEKKEKANDAVILA VEEDU, KADINAMKULAM, CHANNANKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VIKESH VIJAYAN, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYACHANDRAN NAIR, LATHY SADANAM, KADINAMKULAM, CHANNANKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRAN PILLAI, KUNCHUPAZHANCHIRA VEEDU, KADINAMKULAM, CHANNANKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ABHILASH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.BABU, KUNCHUPAZHANCHIRA VEEDU, KADINAMKULAM, CHANNANKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. RAJESH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, PAZHANCHIRA MANAKKATHIL VEEDU, CHANNANKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.G.P.SHINOD, SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT STATE AND INVESTIGATING OFFICER: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AT THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3277 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners(accused nos. 1 to 5) formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and committed house trespass into the house of the de facto complainant and assaulted de facto complainant and thereby committed the various offences. Stone was used for the commission of the offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there was a scuffle between de facto complainant and his brother in their house. Petitioner went to the house and intervened in the quarrel but the petitioners are implicated as an accused. Petitioners are neighbours of the de facto complainant. Petitioners were prepared to appear before the investigating officer and explained their innocence and this court directed them to appear before the investigating officer and they were also questioned. B.A. No. 3277 / 2010 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners were questioned by the investigating officer when they appeared before them under the directions from this court. He also submitted that stones allegedly used for the offences are already seized. This petition is not opposed. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail on the conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: 1. Petitioners shall, in the event of their arrest be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs. 10,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the following conditions: i). Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. ii). Petitioners shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with the evidence. 2). This order will be in force only for a period of 15 days from today and the petitioners shall seek regular bail from the court concerned within such time. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln